Why are you not speaking English?

[crisisweasel]

I like the people in this thread equating illegal immigration reform as being pushed by those who "have a fear of Spanish speakers".

Really? I speak 4 languages (ok, only two fluently but the other two enough to get around), and I could give a **** if they were Cambodian, Portuguese, Lithuanian, or Turkish.

Claim refuted and stuffed into the "ridiculous" folder. That's literally one o the dumbest things that have ever been said on this forum.

Yeah that's you. The number of people I encounter who have strong opinions on immigration who don't start out with some story of them not being able to understand Spanish approaches 100%.

 

[eye95]

Really? The discussions on illegal immigration I have been part of almost NEVER start about language. Most never even get around to talking about language. Some do. Not many.

Examine your axioms. I suspect they are making you see things not as they are, but as you would like them to be.

 

[PavePusher]

One major issue I have about individuals immigrating to America is that they are either to stupid to learn English, or know how to speak English but insist on acting as if they don't know how.

Personally, until proven otherwise, I am taking it upon myself to conclude that most of them are to stupid to learn English.

May I point out your incorrect grammer, and drop a reminder about glass houses and eye beams....

 

[eye95]

May I point out your incorrect grammer, and drop a reminder about glass houses and eye beams....

"When correcting the grammAr of another, it behooves one to spell grammAr correctly."

signed,

Kelsey

 

[slowfiveoh]

Yeah that's you. The number of people I encounter who have strong opinions on immigration who don't start out with some story of them not being able to understand Spanish approaches 100%.

The part of the conversation you are focusing on is probably their disdain for all of our social resources being offered in Spanish, and the complexity and increase in budget that has brought over the years.

It's not the fact said services are offered in Spanish, but the fact that we have to press "1" to continue to in English.

You are likely confusing frustration of nonsensical procedural complexity with a dislike of a particular language.

Truth is, they would be just as frustrated and/or irritated by it if it was offered in Cambodian, Slavic, Portuguese, or Swahili.

Ask yourself why we aren't dialing "9" for English because "1" is for Spanish, "2" is for Deutsch, "3" is for Japanese etc.

Oh that's right, it's because the majority of immigrants, legal or otherwise, come from the southern borders.

 

[Gunslinger]

"When correcting the grammAr of another, it behooves one to spell grammAr correctly."

signed,

Kelsey

I love "Fraser." Plus, he is a rock ribbed conservative Republican and makes no bones about it. His 'grammer" is always excellent...so is Niles'....

 

[Tawnos]

It's not the fact said services are offered in Spanish, but the fact that we have to press "1" to continue to in English.

I never understood why that bothers people, especially when dealing with international companies. Do people really think they're special snowflakes?

 

[slowfiveoh]

I never understood why that bothers people, especially when dealing with international companies. Do people really think they're special snowflakes?

Well, being that I have grown up in the U.S., been all over the U.S., and lived in other countries to boot, I don't think it is "unusual" for a person to believe that the primary language spoken in a given country be utilized as the primary language for all official communications. Seems a simple concept to most I think.

I think the furor over the addition of Spanish to all government systems stems from the fact that it was an "expected" addition by those who may not even be here legally.

The primary concern I believe is not in the source of ones nationality but the control over our borders, the expansion of illegal immigration, and the embracing by the government by conceding to the communication demands of said illegal immigrants.

Myself, personally, I do not care what racial/ethnic/cultural background one comes from so long as they obtain a visa, or, take the citizenship test and pass the simple thing.

 

[Tawnos]

Well, being that I have grown up in the U.S., been all over the U.S., and lived in other countries to boot, I don't think it is "unusual" for a person to believe that the primary language spoken in a given country be utilized as the primary language for all official communications. Seems a simple concept to most I think.

I think the furor over the addition of Spanish to all government systems stems from the fact that it was an "expected" addition by those who may not even be here legally.

The primary concern I believe is not in the source of ones nationality but the control over our borders, the expansion of illegal immigration, and the embracing by the government by conceding to the communication demands of said illegal immigrants.

Myself, personally, I do not care what racial/ethnic/cultural background one comes from so long as they obtain a visa, or, take the citizenship test and pass the simple thing.

Up until the 1920s, we let anyone who wanted to, come here. When speaking of immigration, that's what it means: coming here. It has nothing to do with citizenship (naturalization).

Let me repeat that so it sinks in: prior to the 1920s, anybody could come here, could immigrate here. After arriving here and working for a certain amount of time, they could get citizenship. There wasn’t some arbitrary limit (and if you’re trying to tell me that a 7% max per country limit out of a cap that is affected by a number that some politician made up after drinking one too many martinis isn’t arbitrary, then I really have to wonder what else I can sell you as reasonable) to those who could immigrate. The immigration was legal for everyone, the concept of “illegal immigrant” was silly. Citizenship was a different beast.

Yet those goalposts moved, and the scope creeped. Consider it like the various gun laws (both directions). It starts with a “we’ll just require doing a background check” to ”you need a permit to buy any guns” to “you can’t buy any that are on this list” to “you can’t buy any that have these features” to “you can’t buy any.” In reverse, it’s “you can’t concealed carry” to “you can concealed carry with good cause, as considered by the police, combined with a training class and background check” to “you can concealed carry with a class and background check” to “you can concealed carry with a background check” to “you can concealed carry”. Apply it to freedom to travel, and you have “anybody can come here and be a citizen” to “anybody can come here and after a few years become a citizen” to “anybody can come here and after a few years of working for a certain amount and owning land and being white, become a citizen” to “anybody can come here and after meeting this book of citizenship proficiency demands may become a citizen” to “anybody but people from the following three countries can come here and become a citizen after following this book of demands” to “all countries are now restricted to who may come here, and many who come here may not become citizens because they’re really not allowed to fully come here”.


In the gun case, I prefer the latter story. Why not apply that to our other rights?


The comment about special snowflakes is that many companies use a centralized phone number that can route to call centers with speakers of the relevant language. Getting upset that a company does that is odd to me. As for the government, it's a huge discussion that I don't have time for right now...

 

[since9]

The number of people I encounter who have strong opinions on immigration who don't start out with some story of them not being able to understand Spanish approaches 100%.

Realmente? Es eso verdad? Aprendi el español en la escualidad secundaria, hace mas de 30 años. No me consideraria ser fluido, sino que puedo pasar.

:lol: I may not be as fluent as I thought, as Yahoo!'s Babelfish translated it thusly: "Really? It is that truth? Aprendi the Spanish in the secondary escualidad, does but of 30 years. Consideraria me not to be fluid, but I can happen."

Regardless, I have strong opinions on immigration, and know enough to follow conversations in Spanish while waiting in lines or in other public areas. I also know enough that if I'm faced with a situation in which I need to converse with them, I say "Excuseme. Usted hablaria ingles por favor? Gracias."

 

[PrayingForWar]

Realmente? Es eso verdad? Aprendi el español en la escualidad secundaria, hace mas de 30 años. No me consideraria ser fluido, sino que puedo pasar.

:lol: I may not be as fluent as I thought, as Yahoo!'s Babelfish translated it thusly: "Really? It is that truth? Aprendi the Spanish in the secondary escualidad, does but of 30 years. Consideraria me not to be fluid, but I can happen."

Regardless, I have strong opinions on immigration, and know enough to follow conversations in Spanish while waiting in lines or in other public areas. I also know enough that if I'm faced with a situation in which I need to converse with them, I say "Excuseme. Usted hablaria ingles por favor? Gracias."

You can make me foam at the mouth and get downright nasty talking about legal imigration. It's an issue that effects my family imtimately. We've had to spend thousands of dollars, get all sorts of medical evaluations, psyce evals, criminal checks and months of waiting just for a visa. I have ZERO compassion for ANYONE, who for ANY REASON skirted the laws I HAD TO MAKE FOR DAMN SURE WE FOLLOWED, and are now demanding amnesty. My wife is well educated, speaks fluent english, but witha visa can not legally be employed. WTF!!!

I'm supposed to give a damn about people who must not take any advantage they might have in mexico or wherever else, who jump ahead in line and manage to get work illegally in my country? What sort of bedwetting sociopath in this forum has a word to say about this. I beg you to tell me how I'm not being compassionate, insensitive, RACIST, or whatever BS, by merely suggesting immigrants speak enough of the local language so as to ask for 8 bucks an hour as opposed to 6.

If you want to ask for money in a foriegn land you damn well better speak the local language. That's why my kids will be learning Mandarin, not ****** spanish.

 

[Tawnos]

You can make me foam at the mouth and get downright nasty talking about legal imigration. It's an issue that effects my family imtimately. We've had to spend thousands of dollars, get all sorts of medical evaluations, psyce evals, criminal checks and months of waiting just for a visa. I have ZERO compassion for ANYONE, who for ANY REASON skirted the laws I HAD TO MAKE FOR DAMN SURE WE FOLLOWED, and are now demanding amnesty. My wife is well educated, speaks fluent english, but witha visa can not legally be employed. WTF!!!

I'm supposed to give a damn about people who must not take any advantage they might have in mexico or wherever else, who jump ahead in line and manage to get work illegally in my country? What sort of bedwetting sociopath in this forum has a word to say about this. I beg you to tell me how I'm not being compassionate, insensitive, RACIST, or whatever BS, by merely suggesting immigrants speak enough of the local language so as to ask for 8 bucks an hour as opposed to 6.

If you want to ask for money in a foriegn land you damn well better speak the local language. That's why my kids will be learning Mandarin, not ****** spanish.

Stockholm syndrome: a paradoxical psychological condition where a hostage expresses sympathy towards the hostage-taker, even going so far as to defend them. Likely stemming from the same psychological source that gives us the sunk cost fallacy.

We talk about illegal laws here all the time. We sympathize or defend those who take the stand against those laws. Except when it comes to immigration. Then, three quarters of this website goes full retard (you never go full retard) and HERPA DERPA DOO let's defend a crap policy, because we had to follow it, or others we know did, etc.

Freedom of travel is a right within the US, and Congress's enumerated power is to determine rules of naturalization. NOT if someone can come here. The existence of government programs doesn't change that right. The cost of emergency medical doesn't, either. Both are independent of the freedom to travel, and should be examined on their own merit.

A friend of mine just responded to a similar thread, and I think his words were great

You'd never say that regardless of the morality of Jim Crow laws, they're the law, and while you really think we should change the law, in the meantime those black folks better sit in the back of the bus. That would be f-cking stupid.

"Hey, look, I also think it's wrong to exterminate the Jews, but the people who fled Auschwitz broke the law and cut in line, and all the Jews who stuck around and waited their turn are getting cheated by them."

What a moron. The whole "legal immigrants are getting cheated by illegals" is just a cynical ploy by xenophobes who have no real intention of fixing immigration but don't want to lose the vote of naturalized Hispanics. Either that, or the people making this argument are dumber than I thought, but I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt here and assume they're just aholes.