# To Continue in English, Press #1



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

I refuse to do that. It needs to default to English or I will just wait out the system until I am shunted to a live person. I will then tell the live person I had been attempting to access the automated system but it would not default me to English. I know this sounds horrible, but it is the continued crumbling of the culture IMO, a back door into a _du jour_ bi-lingual country vs. our current _de facto_ one.

I figure I know who will find this practice appalling, but thought I'd put it out there anyways. Keep in mind, those on the US left, I come from an officially bi-lingual country, and grew up under the effects of such a policy. And trust me, French Canadians vs. Anglo Canadians are not nearly as culturally seperated as what is happening here in the land of the _reconquista_.


----------



## RJman (Nov 11, 2003)

Wayfarer said:


> I know this sounds horrible, but it is the continued crumbling of the culture IMO, a back door into a _*du jour*_ bi-lingual country vs. our current _de facto_ one.


De jure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_jure

Read and learn.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

RJman said:


> Wayfarer said:
> 
> 
> > I know this sounds horrible, but it is the continued crumbling of the culture IMO, a back door into a du jour bi-lingual country vs. our current de facto one.
> ...


Ummm, imitation is the highest form of flattery and all that, but please, what exactly are you saying? We currently do have a _de facto_ bi-lingual country and I do not wish it to be _du jour_. Now, I can tell I have wounded your ego from the other thread, but please point out what I need to learn.

Regards


----------



## RJman (Nov 11, 2003)

*To continue in Latin, press 1. To continue in French, press jour.*



Wayfarer said:


> Ummm, imitation is the highest form of flattery and all that, but please, what exactly are you saying? We currently do have a _de facto_ bi-lingual country and I do not wish it to be _du jour_. Now, I can tell I have wounded your ego from the other thread, but please point out what I need to learn.
> 
> Regards


Tch tch tch. No need to get ad hominem here. A soup can be du jour. You appear to have confused soup with some form of legislated linguistic stew in the US. You appear to be attempting to contrast a sad de facto situation with the spectre of such situation becoming enshrined in law -- which would be de jure. Now go eat your soup.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

cufflink44 said:


> I believe RJMan was correcting your Latin. The legal phrase you want is _de jure_, 'by law.' _Du jour_ is French, meaning 'of the day,' as in soup _du jour_.
> 
> Close, but no cigar. :icon_smile:


Ah yes, I did indeed make a spelling error. I do so apologize for this egregious offense and stand corrected. My fear was that I had reversed the two concepts.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

RJman said:


> Tch tch tch. No need to get ad hominem here. A soup can be du jour. You appear to have confused soup with some form of legislated linguistic stew in the US. You appear to be attempting to contrast a sad de facto situation with the spectre of such situation becoming enshrined in law -- which would be de jure. Now go eat your soup.


I am sorry RJman, my comment concerning your ego was not meant as _ad hom_ but more a surmise. I do apologize for my egregious spelling error.

Please note: * I* admit when I have erred.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Now that we have cleared up my egregious spelling inadequacies, would anyone like to comment on the actual thread?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I, too, wish that Spanish was not so readily accepted. One language will bind our culture together more securely.


----------



## patbrady2005 (Oct 4, 2005)

Is it that hard to press #1? Mine's right there on the phone, it's no big deal.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I walked into a San Francisco bar one day full of ad hominems. I tried to order the soup du jour, but the waiter had an accent thicker than Amador in THE BIRDCAGE, and I got a grilled cheese sandwich and cherry coke.It was good though. The issue is not so much of language. After all, english as a world language has more patois and dialects than the tower of Babel, and what we speak today would be largely unintelligable to a pre information age speaker from upstate Maine let alone a bard reciting Mort' de Arthur to a welsh speaker. The issue is one of assimilation, which is largely not happening. Cries that latinos are not gaining access to the Social Ladder due to prejudice ring hollow. We have always had a latin population, one that predated the anglo period and was itself predated by a native american population. Our language, particularly in the west is rich in spanish words. Californios, Tejanos, people of Arizona and New Mexico, Puerto Ricans in Spanish Harlaam and cubanos in Florida hold positions in our society from menial labourers to State governors and federal cabinet positions. But they do it in ENGLISH. English is the language of power and access to a better life here. The only option, one being forced on both populations is seperatism.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

patbrady2005 said:


> Is it that hard to press #1? Mine's right there on the phone, it's no big deal.


_¿Sí, qué pensaba yo? Gracias señor, de ésos que viven abajo el reconquista_.

Edit: btw, excuse any errors in the above, I make no claims to bi-lingualism.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Kav said:


> I walked into a San Francisco bar one day full of ad hominems. I tried to order the soup du jour, but the waiter had an accent thicker than Amador in THE BIRDCAGE, and I got a grilled cheese sandwich and cherry coke.It was good though. The issue is not so much of language. After all, english as a world language has more patois and dialects than the tower of Babel, and what we speak today would be largely unintelligable to a pre information age speaker from upstate Maine let alone a bard reciting Mort' de Arthur to a welsh speaker. The issue is one of assimilation, which is largely not happening. Cries that latinos are not gaining access to the Social Ladder due to prejudice ring hollow. We have always had a latin population, one that predated the anglo period and was itself predated by a native american population. Our language, particularly in the west is rich in spanish words. Californios, Tejanos, people of Arizona and New Mexico, Puerto Ricans in Spanish Harlaam and cubanos in Florida hold positions in our society from menial labourers to State governors and federal cabinet positions. But they do it in ENGLISH. English is the language of power and access to a better life here. The only option, one being forced on both populations is seperatism.


Kav, you have hit several very important points there. Anyone that doubts the US is headed down the road of succession or seperatism, please closely examine Canada. Ask yourself if you are ready for a USA where three out of the nine SCJs have to be latino. Sound far fetched? Three of Canada's nine SCJs have to be from Quebec.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

One language only- English.

It is interesting to see the french in Canada say french everywhere, but english does not need to be in there little french areas. When it really should be english everywhere and french in the french areas only.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

That's pretty paranoid. 

Anyway, around here they changed it to "For english please press one OR stay on the line; para espanol oprime numero dos." That way, the people who think they are going to change the course that America is headed on by refusing to press 1 will still get an operator in English.

Wayfarer, what exactly do you think you're going to accomplish with your small protest?


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

WA said:


> When it really should be english everywhere and french in the french areas only.


Why would that be?


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Now that we have cleared up my egregious spelling inadequacies, would anyone like to comment on the actual thread?


Sure. I'll comment since I am a Latino, and a very good looking one too, and well educated, with high income, self-sovereign, etc. :icon_smile_big: Humble, eh? 

From the 1st generation born here, of my siblings, to include first cousins, I am the only one who speaks Spanish. All the others, including the older siblings, have forgotten their childhood Spanish, or speak it in such a horrible manner, that it's tantamount to nothing. Their English has no trace accents. I am 48 years old, soon to be 49, and was born and raised in downtown Los Angeles. I mean the "real" downtown, in the CBD. In what's known as Clanton 14 "territory." It is _muy_ Latino there, and has been for decades.

The only reason that I speak Spanish so well is because I had several short sojourns where I went to live in Latin America, and because I had to develop professional and technical fluency for certain aspects of my business, which came later. I actually speak Spanish better than my mother, aunts, uncles, etc. Such will not be the case for most children of immigrants from Latin American countries. They will Americanize with the first group born on US soil, and will drop the Spanish.

My beef is that these bilingual programs delay the process of said Americanization. Thankfully, they do not halt it. It also costs me in tax dollars to support the idiocy of these bilingual programs. The Spanish recording that you hear on the telephone is only for the convenience of those who are actual immigrants - in a practical sense. Their offspring will press "1" for English when they hear these recordings.

The other issue is that we are being inundated with immigration from Latin America like at no time before. Legal and illegal. Thus there is a large spike in Spanish being heard right now in the US (and supported by big gooberment and big business, for votes and dollars, respectively). Nevertheless, that first generation born here will for the most part drop the language. They will blend, they actually want to blend, and really have no choice but to blend. They really don't want to clean houses and cut lawns like their parents.

If someone wants to keep the Spanish alive, fine, they can do that on their own dime. I distinctly remember a host of private Japanese schools in L.A. where Nisei kids used to go after regular school hours to study the language and customs of Japan. This is fine, as even those kids Americanized.

Here's how our first-generation-born-on-US-soil did:

1 architect (he's actually famous within his industry).
1 nurse (college educated, now in hospital administration)
1 engineer (he's also famous within his industry).
1 lawyer
2 IT professionals (both college educated)
1 housewife (no college)
1 real estate broker (no college).

All except the housewife are well into the six figures in terms of income. Two are probably millionaires. That's better than most immigrant stats, but also better than most non-immigrant stats. Easy to do in America if one puts forth the effort.

Saludos,

M8


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

M8, good post. The best point and the one I am most concerned with, is the slowing of the assimilation process. As you point out, maintaining cultural heritage is fantastic and something one should be proud of, but the people need to become assimilated.

Regards


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

odoreater said:


> Wayfarer, what exactly do you think you're going to accomplish with your small protest?


My personal satisfaction that I will not aid in allowing the US to become officially bi-lingual. It has nearly torn my home country apart on more than one occasion and I feel the US has enough hot issues to divide people, we do not need to start fostering "distinct society" stuff like happened in Canada.

What did Ghandi think he would accomplish making a handfull of salt?


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> M8, good post. The best point and the one I am most concerned with, is the slowing of the assimilation process...


It's not just with Latinos now, though that is the largest example, but is with all immigrants.

You see, the multicutluralists, who for the most part Leftist Anglo-Americans, are telling the new immigrants to maintain their old ways, and that "Americanizing" is a bad thing. Fortunately most immigrants ignore this advice.

M8


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Étienne said:


> Why would that be?


I think most of Cananada is english speaking and only a few speak french. So there is a lot of paper with double the ink on it pretty much only for the few.

It seems to me that if Canada printed in one language english in the english speaking parts and french in the french speaking parts they would save a huge amount on taxs. But, make it easy to get other language for those that would like it in either place.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Martinis at 8 said:


> It's not just with Latinos now, though that is the largest example, but is with all immigrants.
> 
> You see, the multicutluralists, who for the most part Leftist Anglo-Americans, are telling the new immigrants to maintain their old ways, and that "Americanizing" is a bad thing. Fortunately most immigrants ignore this advice.
> 
> M8


M8, this is getting scary. I agree again.

The thing that people need to remember is that it is immigration that has fired the energy of the US for centuries. Immigration is a good thing. Many immigrants know this also and they tend to become very fruitful members of society. However, if you have an influx of immigration from third world nations, where is the logic in fostering them the ability to set up a third world culture within the US (or Canadian) borders?

IMO, the best examples of what it is to be "American" are often immigrants or their children. They often capture the very best of the essence of what it means to be "American". It is something I wish some on both the far left and far right would sit up and notice.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

WA said:


> I think most of Cananada is english speaking and only a few speak french. So there is a lot of paper with double the ink on it pretty much only for the few.


WA, really, you should refrain from further comment. "Most" of Canada is indeed English speaking, but there are certainly more than "a few" that speak French. Somewhere around 20% hold French as their primary language, give or take a few percent. Even in Essex County, the county directly across from Detroit Michigan, there is a sizeable population that speaks French as their primary language, most notably in the community of Pointe au Rox (Stoney Point). (cannot remember if it is "rox" or "rux", forgive the spelling, my French is fading and it was never that great to start with).


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Anglo-American is perhaps the most insulting illegal immgrant of all. This is a latin term. I am decidedly not an 'ANGLO.' I'm predominently IRISH. I'm the descendant of Corporal Patrick Kavanagh of the San Patricio Brigade who inspired the newly minted word ****** from their battle song. I am not a member of the british commonwealth or a subject of the crown. I am a citizen of the United States. I am an AMERICAN, which all peoples of the new world can claim; south central and north by definition of this hemisphere being named after an italian. Morons call me anglo, I lapse into gaelic or choctaw.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Kav, excellent distinction, would that I try to make and it leaves people rather baffled usually. I mean, all "white" people are the same, right?


----------



## Srynerson (Aug 26, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> I refuse to do that. It needs to default to English or I will just wait out the system until I am shunted to a live person. I will then tell the live person I had been attempting to access the automated system but it would not default me to English. I know this sounds horrible, but it is the continued crumbling of the culture IMO, a back door into a _du jure_ bi-lingual country vs. our current _de facto_ one.


Since, unlike Canada, this practice typically isn't mandated by government, but is rather a result of businesses trying to deliver the best possible customer service, I'm not sure I see your point. Why should business owners choose to forfeit customers for the sake of preserving a "culture"? For that matter, I would suggest that if a corporation deliberately adopted a policy of delivering bad customer service, its officers and directors should probably be sued for breach of fiduciary duty -- their job is to make money for the shareholders.


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

Kav said:


> I am a citizen of the United States. I am an AMERICAN, which all peoples of the new world can claim; south central and north.


What name should be used to define you in your identity as a citizen of the USA then? Do you like the term "usonian" sometimes read here and there?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Srynerson said:


> Since, unlike Canada, this practice typically isn't mandated by government, but is rather a result of businesses trying to deliver the best possible customer service, I'm not sure I see your point. Why should business owners choose to forfeit customers for the sake of preserving a "culture"? For that matter, I would suggest that if a corporation deliberately adopted a policy of delivering bad customer service, its officers and directors should probably be sued for breach of fiduciary duty -- their job is to make money for the shareholders.


Srynerson, at first blush, it seems you have a very valid line of logic here. However, if it was just about delivering "the best customer service" then we would need choices for Farsi, Tagaloog, various Chinese dialects, Japanese....you get the idea. After all, why should business owners choose to forfeit people that speak French as their primary language? Please do not make the argument of numbers to me, that is not what you proposed (_ad hoc_ you understand) and it would imply that Spanish speakers are more highly valued than say, a Gaelic speaker.


----------



## patbrady2005 (Oct 4, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Srynerson, at first blush, it seems you have a very valid line of logic here. However, if it was just about delivering "the best customer service" then we would need choices for Farsi, Tagaloog, various Chinese dialects, Japanese....you get the idea. After all, why should business owners choose to forfeit people that speak French as their primary language? Please do not make the argument of numbers to me, that is not what you proposed (_ad hoc_ you understand) and it would imply that Spanish speakers are more highly valued than say, a Gaelic speaker.


Perhaps Spanish speakers would be more highly valued as customers, simply because there are so many more of them. A business may not worry about losing an extremely small portion of the customer base as it may not be financially worth the investment.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Srynerson said:


> Since, unlike Canada, this practice typically isn't mandated by government, but is rather a result of businesses trying to deliver the best possible customer service, I'm not sure I see your point. Why should business owners choose to forfeit customers for the sake of preserving a "culture"? For that matter, I would suggest that if a corporation deliberately adopted a policy of delivering bad customer service, its officers and directors should probably be sued for breach of fiduciary duty -- their job is to make money for the shareholders.


In the interest of intellectual honesty, I have to say that I was going to make the same argument. In fact, I think that Wayfarer protests too much and that this is not that big of a deal. BUT, I called the Customer Service number for the US Department of Homeland Security Citizenship and Immigration Services and when the recording answered it said something along the lines of "to continue in English, press one; para espanol..."

Anyway, I think people who think that this is some kind of _reconquista_ or the downfall of American culture are exaggerating. Like I've said before, my state has the highest immigrant (both legal and illegal) density in America, and has among the highest immigrating raw populations in America, and I'm just not seeing Hispanic (or any immigrant) culture taking over American culture in any significant way. I think this is an issue that the fear-mongers use for political expediency.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Etienne, Je suis americain-A citizen of the United States of America. Collectively, the western hemisphere is known as The Americas. Therefore, the title can be claimed by a Point Barrow Inuit to a Argentine on Tierra Del Fuego. In USE, american has come to designate us, the U.S. Us is a bad idea, implying there are a bunch of thems. This of course has led to all sorts of boorish behavior from cannibalised **** Erectus fossil skulls to people in reverse baseball caps with nothing much worth cannibalising.


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

As someone who works in a mostly Hispanic area of LA with many Hispanic co-workers here's what I've learned over the years:

1) Many Mexicans feel the SW United States was stolen from them and therefore they are entitled to come and go across the border as they please.

2) Many offspring of illegal immigrants (aka anchor babies) are legal US citizens by birth but consider themselves to be Mexican rather then American.

3) Many Hispanics feel that if someone lives or works in a Hispanic neighborhood they should learn Spanish. 

Here's some info I've heard from various news sources:

1) Many experts believe that as long as the border stays open and given the high birth rates of Hispanics, by the year 2050 the entire US population will be half or slightly more then half Hispanic.

2) 40% of illegal immigrants are on welfare.

3) 1/3 of the CA prision population are illegal immigrants.

4) Illegal immigration has been shown to be the major cause of once rare diseases like TB suddenly springing up especially in border towns.

5) Illegal immigration costs LA county well over a billion dollars a year. Just in LA county. This is just for welfare and medical care. It did not include the cost of education for illegal immigrant children.

6) It is not uncommon for illegal immigrants to have several fraudulant ID's and S.S. numbers so they can recieve bennifits under each different name. A lot of this money ends up going to Mexico.

7) Many illegal immigrants cannot read or write in Spanish let alone English. Many others have no more then a jr. highschool level education.

So this is where America is headed. While the corrupt politicians in Mexico continue to hoist their poverty problem on the US, our politicians continue to encourage it by shameless pandering. If people in Mexico want to come to the US they are more then welcome. Just get in line and go through the process like everyone else from other contries do. Then learn English and contribute to the economy instead of taking from it.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

burnedandfrozen said:


> As someone who works in a mostly Hispanic area of LA with many Hispanic co-workers here's what I've learned over the years:
> 
> 1) Many Mexicans feel the SW United States was stolen from them and therefore they are entitled to come and go across the border as they please.
> 
> ...


Item 1 gets a "maybe" from me in terms of "stolen". Don't forget Mexico lost Central America too. Stolen, or won in war, that's the way it goes, which is why I think Israel should have never given back the Golan Heights.

What you stated above is not true for the majority of Latinos or Mexicans. Take this young man for example Not bad for a *******, eh? And also see my earlier post.

Most sentiment from Hispanic immigration is not as you describe. However, the inundation has to be stopped. My take is that this is not something the US political leadership is serious about, but only something they like to complain about.

Cheers,

M8


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

patbrady2005 said:


> Perhaps Spanish speakers would be more highly valued as customers, simply because there are so many more of them. A business may not worry about losing an extremely small portion of the customer base as it may not be financially worth the investment.


First, as I had pointed out, that is an _ad hoc_ rescue to the presented thesis. Second, the thesis was about providing top quality customer service, that service in languages other than English was actually part of the company brass's fiduciary responsibility. In fact, to quote him:



> Why should business owners choose to forfeit customers..


The only valid part is that indeed Spanish speakers do seem more highly valued, as you said, and that, IMO, is discrimination.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

As far as the SW US being "stolen"...when that comes up in a political talk, I ask them where the "Mexican" tribe of Native Americans lived. I always get this funny look. Then I tell them when the thief has what they stole taken from them, they have little moral high ground for complaining. Which means the US will have no room to complain when the _reconquista_ is complete so something must be done. You would think in the two millenia since Diocletian, people would have learned something.

To those thinking I am paranoid, again, please, please, please examine the state that Canada is in and again, the cultural divide between French Canada and English Canada is 100x smaller than that between US mainstream and hispanic immigrants. No one has yet answered me about the SCJs. Are you ready for it to be mandated three of them are from Aztlan or hispanic? That is exactly the way it is set up in Canada, three on the Supreme Court must always be from Quebec.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Meanwhile, gathered in small, federally unrecognised groups and NO casinos, numerous surviving California indian tribes cling to fading traditions, religons and languages, their very geographic reference points graded and covered in asphalt. The pointless historical arguments of who stole what are all negated should anybody bother asking them. The Chumash 'Gateway to the West' is now an oil facility, the successful and unanimous decision of the archaeological community to boycott the project thwarted by an eager L.D.S. graduate in Utah archaeology to sign everything off with utterly no academic background in this region. Our Alcalde Antonio also cashed in on a huge development temporarilly stalled by several hundred historical indian burials. No problemo, a 'monitor' just out of federal prison for rape and narcotics violations who's great grandmother belonged to his 'tribe' was hired to sign off their bulldozing while activist tribal members were blocked from the property by security guards. History gives us winners and losers. A quick drive to Tijuana beyond the pinata filled tourista cantinas demonstrates what we all face. When it all implodes maybe two or three real natives can gather one last time, find a surviving white sagebush and a plastic plate in lieu of an abalone shell, light it and start over.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

odoreater said:


> Anyway, I think people who think that this is some kind of _reconquista_ or the downfall of American culture are exaggerating. Like I've said before, my state has the highest immigrant (both legal and illegal) density in America, and has among the highest immigrating raw populations in America, and I'm just not seeing Hispanic (or any immigrant) culture taking over American culture in any significant way. I think this is an issue that the fear-mongers use for political expediency.


I agree. I frequently see these statements about what the percentage of Hispanics in the population will be in 2050 or some future year, but I don't think there is much thought given to what this really means.

Here's an example: One of my brothers met and married a woman in Mexico; she has since moved to the United States, learned to speak English very well, and become a United States citizen. They have three kids, all of whom are U.S. citizens and fluent in English. (Actually, it's hard to say their two-year-old is fluent in anything yet, but he's learning both Spanish and English as a native.) It's quite likely that my two neices, at least, will be married and have kids by 2020, and it's quite likely that their kids will be married and have kids by 2050. Thos kids, the grandchildren of my two U.S-born neices, are still going to be counted as part of the Hispanic population of the United States in 2050, yet it is silly to think that their presence will make the United States a Spanish-speaking country.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*Secondary thread...*

Reading through this, I have a secondary question. Why is the left so invested in convincing everyone the _reconquista_ is something invented by the right? I am not rightwing (gmac's opinion aside!), am a first generation immigrant, live in the SW, and have people freely talk about "le emmie" (how La Raza is referred to) and many people down here generally accept the premise of the _reconquista_. Not everyone accepts it mind you, not everyone (of whatever origin) want it or have it as a goal, but when you have your local Federal Congressman, Raul Grijalva, out in the desert stocking supply stations for illegals, you have to at least scratch your head and think, "Huh!". I had never even heard of the term _reconquista_ until I moved to Arizona. I first heard it in a class in grad school entitled Social and Behavioral Aspects of Healthcare and a discussion came about concerning different cultural needs for HIV education.


----------



## Martinis at 8 (Apr 14, 2006)

*Wayfarer*, as Kruschevez said, "your grandchildren will live under the yoke of Mexicanism."

Uh, in fact they might even be Mexican by that time. Yikes!  :icon_smile_big:

M8


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Martinis at 8 said:


> *Wayfarer*, as Kruschevez said, "your grandchildren will live under the yoke of Mexicanism."
> 
> Uh, in fact they might even be Mexican by that time. Yikes!  :icon_smile_big:
> 
> M8


Hehe....most they could be is 50%  25% Japanese, 25% Chinese from maternal grandmom and they'll get Scot with a splash of German from me 

Seriously though, so many people in the SW look Asian to begin with that with Grandmom's input, odds are good they'll look Oriental if our kids marry an hispanic. There's a tribe in the area, the Ak'Chin, and my wife and I kid it is the lost Chinese tribe.

Edit: That reminds me, is there not some current thesis that the Chinese landed on the West Coast now, before Columbus sailed?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> .... yet it is silly to think that their presence will make the United States a Spanish-speaking country.


Good one Mr. Attorney, very subtle, took me two read throughs to see the twist. The premise is not that the US will become a "Spanish-speaking country" but rather that it will change its _de facto_ bi-lingual status to a _de jure_ (hope I got that right this time!) status of bi-lingualism, just like Canada.

Edit: Sorry, forgot obligatory lawyer comment. Do not twist the argument Mr. Attorney, even though that is your instinct.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Good one Mr. Attorney, very subtle, took me two read throughs to see the twist. The premise is not that the US will become a "Spanish-speaking country" but rather that it will change its _de facto_ bi-lingual status to a _de jure_ (hope I got that right this time!) status of bi-lingualism, just like Canada.
> 
> Edit: Sorry, forgot obligatory lawyer comment. Do not twist the argument Mr. Attorney, even though that is your instinct.


It seems to me that _de jure_ we are heading in the opposite direction. That is, from being a _de jure_ multi-lingual country to being a _de jure_ single language (English) country. IIRC the Senate recently voted to set English as the "common and unifying" language of the United States.

Also, I think your statement about having 3 SCOTUS justices be Hispanic shows a lack of understanding about how our constitutional system works. In order for that to happen, it would require a constitutional amendment. To pass a constitutional amendment requires 3/4 of the states to ratify. Even if this so-called _reconquista_ is a problem in the southwest, how would you convince enough states to ratify such an amendment? Seems very far-fetched to me. The rest of America isn't Arizona and America isn't Canada.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

odoreater said:


> It seems to me that _de jure_ we are heading in the opposite direction. That is, from being a _de jure_ multi-lingual country to being a _de jure_ single language (English) country. IIRC the Senate recently voted to set English as the "common and unifying" language of the United States.


Good. Hope it is made the "official" language.


odoreater said:


> Also, I think your statement about having 3 SCOTUS justices be Hispanic shows a lack of understanding about how our constitutional system works. In order for that to happen, it would require a constitutional amendment. To pass a constitutional amendment requires 3/4 of the states to ratify. Even if this so-called _reconquista_ is a problem in the southwest, how would you convince enough states to ratify such an amendment? Seems very far-fetched to me. The rest of America isn't Arizona and America isn't Canada.


I'm am sorry odor, but I understand how the ratification process works probably better than about 98% of people born in the US. Also, did you not say something about your State having a high density of immigrants? The rest of America isn't Arizona, but tell you what, California, Utah, Colorado, Florida, New York and Texas (enough electorial college votes to make someone Prez) have huge hispanic populations. In fact, in some major cities in some of the states I listed, the predominant population is hispanic.

Time will prove one of us wrong and one of us right. I hope I am wrong.

Lastly, how do you think Canada got three SCJs from Quebec? Part of the wrangling to get a Constitution passed. Also, check out how many of the last 10 PMs have been from Quebec. You'll be surprised.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Good. Hope it is made the "official" language.
> 
> I'm am sorry odor, but I understand how the ratification process works probably better than about 98% of people born in the US. Also, did you not say something about your State having a high density of immigrants? The rest of America isn't Arizona, but tell you what, California, Utah, Colorado, Florida, New York and Texas (enough electorial college votes to make someone Prez) have huge hispanic populations. In fact, in some major cities in some of the states I listed, the predominant population is hispanic.
> .


What do electoral votes have to do with getting a constitutional amendment to require 3 hispanic Supreme Court justices? Even if there are states like California, Utah, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., you only need 13 states to vote against an amendment and it is not ratified. There are states like Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Wyoming, Idaho, W. Virginia, Maine, Alaska, Nebraska, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc. that would never vote to have 3 Hispanic Supreme Court justices.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

odoreater said:


> What do electoral votes have to do with getting a constitutional amendment to require 3 hispanic Supreme Court justices? Even if there are states like California, Utah, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., you only need 13 states to vote against an amendment and it is not ratified. There are states like Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Wyoming, Idaho, W. Virginia, Maine, Alaska, Nebraska, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc. that would never vote to have 3 Hispanic Supreme Court justices.


Odor, please stop making it look like I am confusing things. The electoral college of course has nothing to do with Amendment ratification, I gave it as an example of the power of the hispanic vote (I believe the first person elected President that will not be "white" (whatever that means) will be hispanic (which of course, can be "white" but not in terms of minority status it seems, the whole thing seems overly engineered)). Further, you need to listen to NPR, they would make one think all the states you just listed are about 40% hispanic. 

It seems we do not agree, I can accept that. You do not acknowledge anything I put forward as true (so far) and that is fine too. We simply do not seem to have enough common footing to discuss this so we can just go our seperate ways on this. Now I need to run off and eat my machaca con huevos burro before it gets cold!


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Odor, please stop making it look like I am confusing things. The electoral college of course has nothing to do with Amendment ratification, I gave it as an example of the power of the hispanic vote (I believe the first person elected President that will not be "white" (whatever that means) will be hispanic (which of course, can be "white" but not in terms of minority status it seems, the whole thing seems overly engineered)). Further, you need to listen to NPR, they would make one think all the states you just listed are about 40% hispanic.
> 
> It seems we do not agree, I can accept that. You do not acknowledge anything I put forward as true (so far) and that is fine too. We simply do not seem to have enough common footing to discuss this so we can just go our seperate ways on this. Now I need to run off and eat my machaca con huevos burro before it gets cold!


Mmm, that just made me hungry for a Beef Gordita from Taco Bell.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

odoreater said:


> What do electoral votes have to do with getting a constitutional amendment to require 3 hispanic Supreme Court justices? Even if there are states like California, Utah, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., you only need 13 states to vote against an amendment and it is not ratified. There are states like Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Wyoming, Idaho, W. Virginia, Maine, Alaska, Nebraska, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc. that would never vote to have 3 Hispanic Supreme Court justices.


Not to mention Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin etc.

St. Louis has a fairly large Hispanic population, and I used to work at a bank in the middle of one of the more populated areas. I speak Spanish, and would often talk with them, and most told me that that they were trying very hard to learn English and were appreciative that their children had adapted so quickly to the English language. These people came to the US to have a better life, and are working very hard to do so. This is no different than the immigrant waves of Irish (my relatives), Germans (my wife's relatives), Italians, Polish etc. The notion that Hispanics are going to take over the US and create a bilingual nation is ridiculous, and is the same old argument that the Know-Nothing party had against the Irish and other ethnic groups. We are not Gaelic, Italian or German speaking, and neither will we be Spanish speaking. After a time, the Hispanics too will assimilate.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> Not to mention Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin etc.
> 
> St. Louis has a fairly large Hispanic population, and I used to work at a bank in the middle of one of the more populated areas. I speak Spanish, and would often talk with them, and most told me that that they were trying very hard to learn English and were appreciative that their children had adapted so quickly to the English language. These people came to the US to have a better life, and are working very hard to do so. This is no different than the immigrant waves of Irish (my relatives), Germans (my wife's relatives), Italians, Polish etc. The notion that Hispanics are going to take over the US and create a bilingual nation is ridiculous, and is the same old argument that the Know-Nothing party had against the Irish and other ethnic groups. We are not Gaelic, Italian or German speaking, and neither will we be Spanish speaking. After a time, the Hispanics too will assimilate.


When I call my bank and get a choice for German or Gaelic, I'll think we're comparing apples to apples, but until then, it's apples to oranges. Also, at the time of the "We Do Not Hire Irish" there was not a left wing in America facilitating an anti-assimilation stance nor did they feel the US was once theirs and they were merely reconquering it.


----------



## Borat (Sep 23, 2006)

*









Why this cowboy not part of the Minuteman border patrol group?

**'Wow wow wee waa!' *


----------



## Trenditional (Feb 15, 2006)

Wayfarer, you bring up a valid point, but then again do you really think the person on the other end of the phone (IN INDIA!) cares that the prompt isn't to English first?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Trenditional said:


> Wayfarer, you bring up a valid point, but then again do you really think the person on the other end of the phone (IN INDIA!) cares that the prompt isn't to English first?


Heh, that's hilarious. However, I must say, I usually get better service, and the English is better, from a phone jockey in Bangaloor than it is at many local businesses, or god forbid, a call center located in a large US urban area.


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

Lincoln took the air out of the last sucession movement but maybe La Raza and the reconquista will have a better chance. They'll be able to mirror what the Palestinians have done and the UN and Europe will prevent Washington from maintaining control of our own states. 

Of course, Mexico will probably fall into civil war before that happens. Then we will get the honor of hosting all the refugees. Yay us...


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

The terms illegal alien, undocumented worker or the older derogatory '*******' have been assignated largely to mexican nationals because of sheer numbers. Vaque names like latinos and hispanics are at best clumsy. Are italians latino? A basque hispanic? Along with mexicans there are by count guatamalen and el salvadorans as the largest groups. But until recently, guess who were right behind them? Until the economic boom In Ireland it was people from the U.K. and R.of I. MY PEOPLE! The easy entrance into Canada via commonwealth law makes entry here rather easy. And then there is the growing number of illegals from China and a patently unfair handling of cuban vs haitan refugees. The 'reconquista' is a political deceit to justify immigration by people who don't even know their own history. Old California in fact broke off all political recognition to Mexico proper, Tejanos played a prominent and honourable role in the fight vs Santa Anna, that precuror of Samoza, Pinochet, Peron and Fidel ( and were then anything but honourably treated) and The rebellions of indians in New Mexico and the great american freedom fighter Geronimo in Arizona made Mexican soveriegnty about as valid as Pakistan's over the border areas with Afghanistan today. The culture of Mexico is very much a part of the southwest, and I for one would feel sad not having some cervazas and carne asada on Cinqo de Mayo as the ritual corn beef and cabbage and soda bread on Saint Patricks. Immigration is being turned into a very hatefull ethnic war by elements on both sides. We all know who, and what that produces.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Keep in mind, those on the US left, I come from an officially bi-lingual country, and grew up under the effects of such a policy. [/i].


Welcome to the USA - the country of choices.

Follow the dollars and you will most likely see that those companies that have Spanish as a choice have a large group of Spanish speaking costumers. If they had a large group of German customers then German would be a choice - it's called capitalism.

BTW, your protest would be more effective if you simply stopped doing business with said companies. By still continuing to do business with them after staying on the line you are still supporting them and in effect their practice of listing Spanish as a choice.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> Welcome to the USA - the country of choices.
> 
> Follow the dollars and you will most likely see that those companies that have Spanish as a choice have a large group of Spanish speaking costumers. If they had a large group of German customers then German would be a choice - it's called capitalism.


First, thanks for introducing me to capitalism. If you have read any of my posts you will see I am totally unfamiliar with it and in no way can endorse it. Second, you will see I never had a problem with language choices, my point was that I should need to take no pro-active steps to be serviced in English.


gsi said:


> BTW, your protest would be more effective if you simply stopped doing business with said companies. By still continuing to do business with them after staying on the line you are still supporting them and in effect their practice of listing Spanish as a choice.


That would simply be foolish. Even someone such as myself that was totally unfamiliar with capitalism before you introduced me to it, knows my relatively miniscule portion of revenues generated will in no way affect a company's bottom line. I cost them more taking up productive time and bandwidth listening to me carp about the policy. I also take the time to mail back "pre-approved" type credit apps in their own self-addressed stamped envelope. If enough people do that, we will cease getting pre-printed checks for 50k and the odds of mail theft causing identify crimes will decrease as it will become too costly to do blind mailers based on zip codes and inferential credit analysis. The protest is on the order of Ghandi making salt.

Cheers


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> First, thanks for introducing me to capitalism. If you have read any of my posts you will see I am totally unfamiliar with it and in no way can endorse it. Second, you will see I never had a problem with language choices, my point was that I should need to take no pro-active steps to be serviced in English.


You chose to do business with them, you play by their rules. That's how it works.



Wayfarer said:


> That would simply be foolish. Even someone such as myself that was totally unfamiliar with capitalism before you introduced me to it, knows my relatively miniscule portion of revenues generated will in no way affect a company's bottom line. I cost them more taking up productive time and bandwidth listening to me carp about the policy. I also take the time to mail back "pre-approved" type credit apps in their own self-addressed stamped envelope. If enough people do that, we will cease getting pre-printed checks for 50k and the odds of mail theft causing identify crimes will decrease as it will become too costly to do blind mailers based on zip codes and inferential credit analysis. The protest is on the order of Ghandi making salt.
> 
> Cheers


What do you hope to accomplish by "taking up productive time and bandwidth listening to me carp about the policy"? You are only wasting a "relatively miniscule portion" of the company's productive time and bandwidth.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> You chose to do business with them, you play by their rules. That's how it works.


Wow. So under capitalism the customer plays by the seller's rules. That is one heck of an economic system you've just introduced me to!



gsi said:


> What do you hope to accomplish by "taking up productive time and bandwidth listening to me carp about the policy"? You are only wasting a "relatively miniscule portion" of the company's productive time and bandwidth.


Yes, but I am receiving the service I want plus talking to a real person. Real people will then know what I am doing. It's all a process.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> You chose to do business with them, you play by their rules. That's how it works.


So then you buy energy from Enron? Do not believe in Lemon Laws? Consumer Protection?


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> So then you buy energy from Enron? Do not believe in Lemon Laws? Consumer Protection?


How do you equate Lemon Laws & Consumer Protection to having to press "1" for english?

If Enron had a phone prompt that said push "1" to support our illegal account practices, I would choose not to do business with them rather than stay on the line so I could tell them that I think doing something illegal is wrong and then do business with them.

Again, what are you trying to accomplish? If you just want to get your business done, press 1 and get it done faster.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Wow. So under capitalism the customer plays by the seller's rules. That is one heck of an economic system you've just introduced me to!.


Of course not, you can choose not to do business with them. There's nothing illegal with having to press 1. There are plenty of choices and what you are doing is one of them. It just seems like a waste of your time. Don't you value your time more than the time of the person in the call center answering your call?



Wayfarer said:


> Yes, but I am receiving the service I want plus talking to a real person. Real people will then know what I am doing. It's all a process


If that's how you want to spend your time then ok. When you're talking to that real person, they are just typing it into the same system that you would be using if you'd pressed 1. As soon as you hang up that real person you talked to forgets all about your transaction.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> How do you equate Lemon Laws & Consumer Protection to having to press "1" for english?


Do you even read what you post? I did not make that equation, you did.



gsi said:


> You chose to do business with them, you play by their rules. That's how it works.


So buy a car and it's a lemon, too bad, you play by "their rules". Get ripped off? Too bad, "you play by their rules".

Cheers


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> There's nothing illegal with having to press 1.


I do not remember positing that it was illegal.


gsi said:


> There are plenty of choices and what you are doing is one of them. It just seems like a waste of your time. Don't you value your time more than the time of the person in the call center answering your call?


Yes, but I value my tiny futile attempt to maintain the culture of the US more.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Do you even read what you post? I did not make that equation, you did.


We were discussing having to press 1 for English

I said "You chose to do business with them, you play by their rules. That's how it works."

You responded with



Wayfarer said:


> So then you buy energy from Enron? Do not believe in Lemon Laws? Consumer Protection?


So, yes you are equating doing business with Enron, not believing in lemon laws or consumer protection with companies that make you press 1 for English.


----------



## ceaton (Feb 15, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Lastly, how do you think Canada got three SCJs from Quebec?


It's ostensibly because civil law in Quebec does not follow English Common Law, but rather the code civil (Criminal law is the same in all of Canada). Those three judges are supposed to give the court enough background to properly adjudicate civil matters from Quebec.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> I do not remember positing that it was illegal.


You are comparing having to press 1 for English with being in violation of the Lemon Laws. One is illegal and one isn't!



Wayfarer said:


> Yes, but I value my tiny futile attempt to maintain the culture of the US more.


Again, how does having a customer service rep listen to you "carp about the policy" maintain the culture?


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> So buy a car and it's a lemon, too bad, you play by "their rules". Get ripped off? Too bad, "you play by their rules".
> 
> Cheers


Again you are comparing laws with a way a company chooses to legaly do business. Having to press 1 for english is not covered under any law that I know of. A company can chose to only service people in Farsi if they choose - and it's your choice to do business with and support them.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> Again you are comparing laws with a way a company chooses to legaly do business. Having to press 1 for english is not covered under any law that I know of. A company can chose to only service people in Farsi if they choose - and it's your choice to do business with and support them.


Again, I never stated pressing one for English had a legal standing. I think you are failing to acknowledge the logical corner I backed you into on purpose. Either way, the conversation has dead ended.

Cheers


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

ceaton said:


> It's ostensibly because civil law in Quebec does not follow English Common Law, but rather the code civil (Criminal law is the same in all of Canada). Those three judges are supposed to give the court enough background to properly adjudicate civil matters from Quebec.


Exactly ceaton. Hence if the US has the creation of Atzlan, the goal of many in La Raza and other groups, there will be a segment of the population much larger, both numerically and proportionally, than Quebec has relative to Canada. One can then assume an even stronger imperative for SCJs that do not come from the heritage of English common law. Is it a stretch? Sure thing. Totally impossible? I do not think so.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Again, I never stated pressing one for English had a legal standing. I think you are failing to acknowledge the logical corner I backed you into on purpose. Either way, the conversation has dead ended.
> 
> Cheers


I believe you have backed yourself into a corner. You have been unable to explain how your actions will achieve your goal. Your act of not pressing 1 does absolutely nothing to stop the "continued crumbling of the culture ". It's your time though and if you think that's the most productive way to use it then carry on.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

'For English, press 1. For American, press 2. Orfay Igpay Atinlay, resspay 3.'


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> I believe you have backed yourself into a corner. You have been unable to explain how your actions will achieve your goal. Your act of not pressing 1 does absolutely nothing to stop the "continued crumbling of the culture ". It's your time though and if you think that's the most productive way to use it then carry on.


Oh Bravo! The old, "I'm rubber, you're glue" gambit.

Cheers


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Oh Bravo! The old, "I'm rubber, you're glue" gambit.
> 
> Cheers


It seems you have proved my point - You are unable to explain how your actions will achieve your goal.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

If you haven't noticed, Wayfarer just did. This thread has provoked discussion of an issue some individuals had not thought about.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Kav said:


> If you haven't noticed, Wayfarer just did. This thread has provoked discussion of an issue some individuals had not thought about.


Shhhh Kav! No giving away the answers!

Regards


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Shhhh Kav! No giving away the answers!
> 
> Regards


Looks like I poked too many holes in your argument and you want to change the subject.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

gsi said:


> Looks like I poked too many holes in your argument and you want to change the subject.


Ah yes, the "declare myself winner" gambit. Hmmm, two familiar gambits, fixation on me....anti-Israel in another thread.....this is like deja vu.

Cheers


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Ah yes, the "declare myself winner" gambit. Hmmm, two familiar gambits, fixation on me....anti-Israel in another thread.....this is like deja vu.
> 
> Cheers


Personal attacks do not stengthen your argument.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Do I get to be the first to bring up Hitler?


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Kav said:


> Do I get to be the first to bring up Hitler?


Only if I may be the first to invoke the 'intention of the Founding Fathers' .:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Some of these threads remind me of Lewis Carroll- " Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum AGREED to have a fight." By the time we've hit a few score posts the initiating post has been worried into a torn scrap of bloody hide, the view obscured by the dust of battle and Chuck Norris is nowhere to be found. There, I mentioned Hitler and Chuck first. Press #2 and I'll somehow interject Cantiflas, Antonio Aguillar, Antonio Villaregosa, and why not? Anthony Quinn, son of a mexicana and irish father fighting in the revolution who's best remembered for playing a greek. It's midnight, my G/F just signed off chat from Bucharest and I finished the microwave crabcakes and a Hershey bar with Almonds. Think I'll press #3 for snooze alarm in the morning so I don't miss Thomas the train. Sir Topham Hat always inspires me to shave and smile.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Jimmy Braddock was a helluva fighter.


----------

