Below is my column in the California Post and New York Post on the recent claims made by Democratic candidates in the debate for California’s governorship. As expected, the race-baiting rhetoric flowed from each of the Democratic candidates, including a claim that requiring English proficiency is “racial profiling.”
Here is the column:
If you go to NASCAR to watch the cars crash, the Democratic gubernatorial race in California has been a thrilling pile-up.
The recent debate saw all the Democratic candidates play the race card over a curious issue. When asked if they supported the move to rescind at least 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, every single Democrat declared the policy racist. The candidates also pledged to support truckers who cannot speak or read English.
When Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican candidate, said that being able to read English (and particularly English signs) should be mandatory, Porter lectured the Hispanic sheriff on racism, saying that his support for English proficiency by truckers disqualified him from being governor of California.
Not to be outdone, Democratic candidate Tom Steyer declared that requiring truck drivers to be able to read English is “racial profiling.”
Steyer, a billionaire, has been funding his own campaign with almost $120 million and has tried to capture the far-left supporters of Swalwell. In so doing, he has increasingly looked like Howard Hughes with better-trimmed nails.
Steyer grabbed Swalwell’s platform of pledging to arrest ICE officers and take punitive measures against them. He cannot fulfill that pledge, and the Ninth Circuit recently shot down the flagrantly unconstitutional California law seeking to dictate the conduct or appearances of federal officers. The law was supported by Gov. Gavin Newsom and all of the Democratic candidates.
Steyer’s claim that English proficiency rules are “racial profiling” is more Looney Tunes than law.
Racial profiling occurs when a person’s racial appearance alone is grounds for reasonable suspicion for a stop or search. English proficiency requirements are race-neutral conditions to ensure basic safety in the operation of large trucks. We have seen several fatal cases involving undocumented persons who could not read or speak English proficiently.
Even the use of apparent race or ethnicity is allowed when part of a totality of circumstances or observations by law enforcement. Last year, the Supreme Court stayed a racial profiling case from California on that ground, in favor of law enforcement, in a 6-3 decision in Noem v. Vasquez-Perdomo.
If requiring English proficiency is racial profiling, a wide array of jobs in the United States are the products of racism, including airplane pilots, air traffic controllers, U.S. military, astronauts, mechanics, and baseball umpires. Even the European Space Agency has required English proficiency.
By Steyer’s standard, he may also be the product of a racial profiling system. In order to appear on the ballot, Steyer certified that he is a U.S. citizen. To be a U.S. citizen, you must be proficient in English. Thus, a candidate must certify that he is both a citizen and English-proficient. He can then go on a stage and call such requirements racial profiling without any basis in the law.
Ironically, Steyer made much of his money managing Farallon Capital Management, which profited from owning private prisons and, in the case of Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), actually runs one of the largest ICE facilities. Now called CoreCivic, the company requires not only U.S. citizenship but also English proficiency.
As with the pledges to arrest ICE officers and dictate how they conduct their operations, the racial profiling claim is knowingly misleading and unfounded. It is designed to pander to the far left by suggesting that requiring basic English skills of large-truck operators is somehow unlawful or unconstitutional.
The only thing that Steyer proved, again, is that there are sadly few requirements to run for governor of California beyond a large fortune and little shame.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
I’m a White Male.
When I graduated high school, I enlisted in the Navy, served my four years, got a job and went to college at night, got married and my wife and I raised three children. I am a Christian, I stand for the National Anthem, I pay my taxes and obey the law. I can define a woman.
I support the police and know that Illegal Aliens must be deported to save our country.
Democrats hate me
If you don’t shoplift, assassinate people, sexually mutilate children, defund the police, or put men in women’s showers and locker rooms, then they hate you even more.
I am still bewildered how supposedly intelligent, educated people can entertain the thought of sexually mutilating children. It is stunning. I think the ability to even entertain those thoughts originates in some form of deep, psychotic hatred of people and likely themselves. The thoughts are disturbing and the acts are obscene and unforgivable.
Look at their values – these people are not happy. They do not want to be happy. They want everyone to be as miserable as they are.
The incidence of anxiety and depression is twice as high in men as women.
Twice as high in 20 yr olds as 60 yr olds
twice as high for those on the left as those on the right.
Rates of Anxiety and depression are near 75% in you white leftwing women,
and almost non-existant in old white right leaning men.
anxiety and depression are symptoms that your life and values are screwed up.
It’s far more serious than that, JS. Look at the people at CECOT and understand in a complete collapse they’d be roaming.
Agree. And all government documents should be in English. Need a translator? Hire one. English proficiency should be require for permant residency or naturalization. Just imagine the relief on budgets and services if we deported all 30-40 million illegals, 50% of whom are on some form of public assistance! Sure there would be some economic dislocations but in time we would be better off.
Hyphenate-invader democrats may hate Americans.
Americans may not love their country or even have a country, and Americans may not hate hyphenate-invader democrats.
The American Founders established a Nation, Its Law, and Its Population.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798, 1802
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof….
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Nation is gone. The Law is gone. The Population is gone.
____________________________________________________________________
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union…secure the Blessings of Liberty TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY….
– Preamble, 1787
_____________________
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
________________________
You couldn’t.
“The only thing that Steyer proved, again, is that there are sadly few requirements to run for governor of California beyond a large fortune and little shame.”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
The only thing that Democrats proved is that the only requirement to run for governor of the foreign communist one-party state of California is membership-in-good-standing in the foreign communist party, that is, the Democrat Party.
Every person in this country must be fluent in English, denied entry, or deported.
It is not incumbent upon the American taxpayer to facilitate any immigration, interpretation, or understanding of English.
Those who enter this country must speak English or provide and pay for their interpreters or assistance in understanding the national language.
Anon, Italy has such laws and guess where the “pope” lives.
Imagine having to live in a world like this for lifetime.
Were the American Founders racist?
Did the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the Founders prohibit the very Founders themselves?
Did they write their fundamental law to constitute a suicide pact?
Has the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court, actually supported the Constitution—the letter and spirit of the Founders—or something arbitrary and akin to the Communist Manifesto?
I’m sure you have a position on Turley’s article from your series of questions. I just can’t figure out what it is.
People must adapt to freedom.
Freedom does not adapt to people.
Dictatorship does.
Holding an opinion on race is freedom.
Ordering someone to hold a particular opinion on race is dictatorship.
Did I get that right?
Wait! These foreign invader hyphenates are NOT racist because racism is bad.
Saying that requiring English proficiency is ‘racial profiling’ is the equivalent of saying that your seeking a surgeon, who is skillful, to cut you open (and sew you up), or your seeking a pilot who can actually fly a plane, to guide your flight, is ‘racial profiling’. The left is now fully nihilist. That is, the left rejects with prejudice any facts which clash with leftist ideology as well as all human values, honesty, competence, integrity, excellence, beauty, etc., as such. What’s left inside their heads is hatred of the good for being good and also for life itself. The direct result of that anger is the frequent outbreak of left wing violence and destruction. Longer term, the left, with their attacks on values and on freedom and individual rights, is desperately seeking to impose a police state in America and world wide. I would feel sorry for them if they weren’t so obnoxious and destructive.
For the Crazy left. Everything is racist.
I guess it’s also racial profiling to require basic math proficiency to get a job as an engineer, right? If I’m driving over a bridge above a deep canyon, my first thought is, I hope the engineers who designed this bridge weren’t required to be good at math because that would be racial profiling.
oldman
Or a good medic who paid attention in class. (-:
If all drivers are required to be fluent in reading English, then there is no problem. The issue isn’t race, but reading ability.
I recall driving in Germany once, and seeing an incomprehensible 40-character one-word warning … followed by “Achtung!”. I hope I complied. The first time I drove in England, I was a serous menace on the road, and it had nothing to do with race. The issue is what the local nation considers as minimal requirements for all drivers.
Clearly none of the people saying that English is not required to operate a tractor trailer don’t know any truck drivers. Obtaining a legitimate CDL requires a lot of technical knowledge, written and oral communication skills and an understanding of federal motor carrier regulations. Most if not all states require that drivers attend accredited truck driving schools, pass extensive written and oral tests as well as passing criminal background checks. It is vital that drivers can read instructional signs (not just road signs with “symbols”) that direct where trucks are allowed or prohibited (see bridges and tunnels leading into and out of cities such as NYC) as well as height clearance signage and other safety and hazard signs present at loading and unloading facilities. When you consider the special hazmat and TWIC designations that require additional technical testing and more extensive background tests it becomes even more apparent that English proficiency is imperative. Truck drivers are essentially operating 80,000 pound missiles on our highways and through our towns and cities. American citizens rightly have to jump through multiple hoops in order to be allowed to obtain CDL’s. Many of the states that hand out CDL’s to non-english speaking foreign nationals don’t require the same qualifications for these people that are demanded of American drivers. Look into Non-Domicile CDL programs. Basically all that is required of these folks is an attestation that they have been a commercial truck driver in what ever third-world country they immigrated from. Do some research before you arrogantly assume that blue collar professions don’t require specialized training and technical skills.
The problem is not administering the tests. It’s how they choose how to pick who should be given the tests. DOT or highway patrols stopping truck drivers because they look foreign IS racial profiling. Turley seemingly used Kavanaugh’s opinion, which was not really an official court opinion to justify racial profiling.
Pulling over truckers because they look foreign is still illegal. If every trucker who gets pulled over for a traffic or rule violation gets to be tested for English proficiency then I would be fine with it. But that doesn’t address the question of mute or deaf drivers because they can still get a CDL even if they don’t speak English.
Ha ha, but they can read English. There’s the rub.
OMG george.
Most are caught at weight stations.
Only a crazy left-wing fool would think this is racist. It’s called safety, which has NO skin color.
Caught doing what? If they are singled out because they look foreign that is not a legal reason to suspect they don’t speak or read English.
Safety? What do does poor truck maintenance have to do with English? Truck companies don’t have to prove English fluency to keep trucks safe for the road.
Your off in lala land.
You like all left wing nuts CONSTANTLY conflate the courts saying you can not reach reasonable suspicion SOLELY on race with you can not reach reasonable suspicion at all if the person is of a minority.
Race and ethnicity (and sex) are legitimate elements building to reasonable suspicion.
If the police radio reports – a black man driving a Blue Toyota just robbed a liquor store and is headed west on Main street,
And an officer a mile away sees a black man driving a Blue Toyota just robbed a liquor store and is headed west on Main street – he has reasonable suspicion to pull him over.
If everything else is the same but the driver is a white woman – he does not.
“DOT or highway patrols stopping truck drivers because they look foreign IS racial profiling. ”
Correct – and the Supreme court has properly determined that profiling is legal.
The police may NOT stop someone SOLELY because they “look foreign”.
But ethnicity is a LEGITIMATE bit of evidence in establishing reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
The police do not stop Grannies in adult diapers when they are looking for a Terrorist who just shot up a gay night club shouting Alah Akabar.!
Regardless if you are driving a truck you Damn well better be able to demonstrate proficiency in truck diving AND the ability to navigate US road signs.
“Pulling over truckers because they look foreign is still illegal.”
No it is not illegal. If the ONLY reason for pulling someone over is they look foreign – then you do not have sufficient reasonable suspicion for a stop.
But the officer can still stop you, they just risk having any evidence obtained thrown out of court.
However the court HAS repeatedly reaffirmed that visible ethnicity can be an element contributing to reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
“If every trucker who gets pulled over for a traffic or rule violation gets to be tested for English proficiency then I would be fine with it.”
What YOU would be fine with – does not matter.
Law enforcement can pull over anyone who they have “reasonable suspicion” regarding – race or ethnicity ALONE is not enough to reach reasonable suspicion.
But it IS a permissible bit of evidence leading towrds reasonable suspicion.
“But that doesn’t address the question of mute or deaf drivers because they can still get a CDL even if they don’t speak English.”
Not if they can not read english road signs.
John say, no. The Supreme Court did not say it is legal to do racial profiling. The Supreme Court has never said “profiling is legal.” Instead, it has ruled that race can be a piece of the puzzle, but never the whole puzzle. Claiming that a DOT officer can stop a trucker just because they “look foreign” remains a direct contradiction of 50 years of Fourth Amendment law.
This article and all these comments! Almost laughed out loud on so many points.
1. You don’t need to be proficient in English to BE a US Citizen. To become a naturalized US Citizen yes.
2. Signage has minimal verbiage to allow for quick reading and quick basic understanding of the sign. Understanding words/symbols on road signs is very easy in any country.
3. The policy is of course not racial profiling but racist? The preponderance of evidence is that the policy seeks to limit the job pool for persons not born and raised in the US. And it doesn’t provide the resources means to eliminate the language deficiency. So it seems to be purely punitive without remediation.
4. Dreyer is just another billionaire that wants his own power pool to swim in. Being a billionaire should be a disqualification for public office just as it would be for military service
Being a billionaire is not a disqualification for military service. And there’s not more that goes into reading road signs, especially temporary ones than just looking at symbols.
A first task of Mao was to establish a common language in China and move to a phonics based reading and writing system. That’s been accomplished in record time. The reverse is true as a cultural disruption.
The Constitution is an English document of the enlightenment when western civilization moved from magic to reason. If reason is not implemented western civilization may regress to the magic of what the gods’ want. We have managed to remove beating human hearts as transplants. It’s questionable.
Lovely weather we’re having.
^^^ does it make your brain swim? God wants beating human hearts. Do you see the point?
YES, English required. Get that through your thick heads. YES, safety fffing matters.
Jesus H. Christ
Ano
YES, safety fffing matters.
*************************
Not to the left. Just another way for them to say “racist”
Dear Mr. Turley, when folks running for office haven’t an original thought in their brains, racism is what they turn to and unfortunately there is an appetite for it.
It is my hope the republicans will win the governor’s office in California and will restore that beautiful state to its former glory.
What about a mute truck driver? A mute driver serves as a key test case for whether “English proficiency” is strictly about spoken verbalization or about a broader functional literacy and civic participation. Or how about a hearing impaired or deaf driver? Both can read and understand English.
Current federal regulations under 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2) state a driver must be able to “read and speak” English sufficiently to converse with the public and respond to official inquiries. Critics of the current crackdown can argue that a strict interpretation would unfairly disqualify mute or hearing-impaired drivers who are otherwise perfectly safe and literate.
The FMCSA has issued guidance clarifying that the English language rule should not prohibit drivers who can read and write in English but cannot speak, “for whatever reason”. This indicates that the “American” shared language is legally defined more by its function (reading signs, filling out reports) than by the physical act of speaking.
A mute driver can challenge the “Babelizing” argument by showing that one can fully participate in the “shared American language” through written and visual literacy without ever uttering a word. Deaf or hard of hearing drivers can easily communicate thru technology and not need to show they can “speak” English. There are real-time speech to text apps already available.
Deaf drivers can get a CDL. Under the current ‘strict’ enforcement deaf drivers cams “speak” English. Even if they understand and read English perfectly but cannot speak it should they also have their CDL’s revoked?
X, should truck drivers need to be able to read English? Yes or no.
Yes, but the law says “read AND speak” English. How can you prove you can read English when a mute driver can’t speak it?
Deaf mute persons “speak” using sign language. Thus, they “speak” English through ASL If the immigrant driver is able to communicate in English by signing, he can read and “SPEAK” the language.
But the literal meaning is to be able to speak, not sign. A DOT inspector or highway patrol doesn’t not “speak” asl or esl. Literally they can revoke the license on the spot.
No,George, they have translating apps that SPEAK a response to questions. Use your head boy.
So? A foreigner with poor English can also use translating apps.
The big excuse is the inability to speak English. A mute driver can’t speak. But if it’s ok to use an app so can an immigrant driver. Both facilitate communication.
” But if it’s ok to use an app so can an immigrant driver. “
We are talking about commercial truck drivers driving on the expressway, and seeing a sign they are not familiar with. While driving you want them to open an app and read it. Think again.
A. Meyer, we ARE talking about commercial truck drivers.
“While driving you want them to open an app and read it. Think again.”
You’re not paying attention to the discussion. Nobody is saying we should use an app to read traffic signs. Nobody. We are talking about interacting with law enforcement, DOT lnspectors, highway patrol.
Traffic signs and road signs follow an international standards that even non-commercial truck drivers who are immigrants can follow without too much trouble.
You do know there are GPS units you can put on your dash giving directions and showing signs in any language, right?
If a mute or deaf commercial truck driver can use an app to communicate with law enforcement so can immigrants with poor English.
“rescind at least 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, every single Democrat declared the policy racist. “
These are the words of Turley.
We do not need to diddle around with your nonsense. What we need to look at are the accidents that occurred killing people.
You did not define your words carefully enough, nor the words of those which preceded yours, nor do you consider your usual foolish statements. I actually believe, based on what you write, that you are too ignorant to discuss these issues.
Yes, you are right. AND over 150 countries either require or accept IDP (international driving permit) that addresses much of this.
“Moreover, for those who are not fluent in the local language of the country they are visiting, understanding road signs and legal documents can become a daunting task. This is where professional translation services come into play.”
https://www.asaptranslate.com/course-guide-translation-services
AND the earlier commenter (about American truck drivers in e.g., South America), was apparently not aware that American truckers who haul trade/cargo are stopped at the border, where customs holds the cargo WHICH, AFTER CLEARANCE, IS THEN PICKED UP AND TRANSFERRED TO local trucks/drivers.
https://cargado.com/blog/a-guide-to-cross%E2%80%91border-freight-between-the-u-s-mexico/
God you’re a dumb fool, you can be a mute and have reading and writing comprehension skills. Sign language is taught in public schools as standard curriculum. Most police officers and ER personnel receive training in standard sign language, such as I am a mute or I am hearing impaired.
“ Sign language is taught in public schools as standard curriculum.”
LOL! Show me where does it say every public school must teach sign language because it’s standard curriculum.
“ Most police officers and ER personnel receive training in standard sign language, such as I am a mute or I am hearing impaired.”
“Most” is a severe understatement. The “training” is just watching a short video to make them aware of the fact there are deaf or mute people they may encounter.
It’s not common among cops.
Jezzz george is at again.
He fool, how many (mute) pilots do you know.
Dustoff, false equivalence. Not even close.
“How can you prove you can read English when a mute driver can’t speak it?”
Another what about. The answer to that is simple enough for a child to figure out, yet you, lacking any observable intellect are on this blog spewing BS without a filter.
“What about . . .”
Welcome to today’s Rabbit Hole.
Go down it. Get dizzy. Waste time. Lose track of terra firma.
” deaf driver?
Because you have no critical thinking skills you fall back to what about. What about a “deaf drive”r; what about a low IQ aspiring doctor? They both have the same problem filling the needs of their profession.
What about you answer the rebuttal’s provided to you on this blog? If there were licensing for critical thinking, you wouldn’t be permitted to post.
“Current federal regulations under 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2) state a driver must be able to “read and speak” English sufficiently to converse with the public and respond to official inquiries. ”
If you do not like the law – challenge the law.
“Critics of the current crackdown can argue”
I do not care.
Are those “cracking down – enforcing the actual law ?
If so – challenge the law. Not those enforcing the law.
You are demonstrating exactly what “the rule of man, not law” is.
The responsibility of the executive – democrat or republican is to ENFORCE the law we have.
When Democrats in power turn a blind eye to violations of the law – that is LAWLESS.
It is lawless even if they do not like the law and think it is racist.
If you do not like the law – CHANGE IT.
Do not pi$$ over those enforcing it.
You want to pi$$ all over police for actually lawless conduct – and that DOES happen – I am with you.
But when you equate the police enforcing the laws you do not like with them dragging someone into an alley and beating them up
YOU are the problem.
We WANT police who FOLLOW THE LAW – who do not beat up people they do not like and who DO ENFORCE the law – whether they like that law or not.
Of course requiring English to drive a truck is racist. It vastly disproportionately affects members of a race. English is not needed to drive safely. Very few regulatory signs have words.
“English is not needed to drive safely.”
While you (and the rest of the Left) smear race everywhere, tell that to the family members of Herby Dufresne, Faniola Joseph, and Rodrigue Dor.
All three were killed by an illegal immigrant truck driver, who made an *illegal* U-turn *because he could not read* the highway safety sign prohibiting U-turns. (And that’s not one example of your racist smears kill the innocent.)
An expert stricks again. Do you know what a Jake Break is?
Brake that is.
I do and they are damn noisy LOL
Gw, do you know what strick is?
Which race are truck drivers a member of?
OOOOOOOOO good one.
Try human?
Sally
How does speaking the English language discriminate racially? Are you saying only white Americans speak English and drive?
To drive an 18 wheeler in America, a driver is required to go through various physical and background checks, meet rigid driving rules and understand the rules and regulations of interstate highway transportation operations. States like California have issued these rated licenses to drivers from other countries that have no or little regulatory restrictions. Americans have recently seen several fatal accidents caused by this very failure. This has zero to do with racism and everything to do with public safety.
Wasn’t it Joe Biden who said, “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.” ?
(said to Charlamagne tha God).
(The fact that Charlemagne capitalizes “God” in his name is scary enough for those learning English, (chuckle!)
Professor Turley, you are obviously a smart person whose actual thinking has got to more intelligent than the false dichotomies you generally present. “Racial profiling” OR “Race baiting”? How many American truckers do you think enter Latin America without Spanish proficiency? Should they be banned too? How many American tourists drive cars in countries where they don’t speak the language? Ban that?
Signs on highways intentionally don’t require much English. It is totally possible to fulfill the job of truck driver without English, while other jobs like pilot, astronaut, and ATC require English because it is actually needed. There have been a FEW accidents with drivers who don’t speak English? And 100s times as many with drivers who DO speak English. By your level of argumentation we should BAN English speakers.
No, US citizens don’t HAVE to speak English, as you well know. It is only necessary for naturalization.
You are assuming your audience is dumb, and frankly, plenty of them live down to that assumption. I know you can do better.
“Signs on highways intentionally don’t require much English.”
BS.
Try learning the meaning of those countless symbols and recalling those meanings — as a professional trucker — without being proficient in English.
Actually there’s a reason why particular shapes and colors are also used. They are also international standards. Stop signs are red octagons in Mexico they say “ALTO”, France and Canada “ARRET”, Turkey “DUR”. Important road signs all have a standard shape and color AND universal pictures, right? You would recognize a crosswalk with a sign and a picture of people crossing in Japan and here in the U.S.
Symbols are easier to understand and follow.
Non-professor Anonymous, you are obviously thinking that you are a smart person whose actual thinking belies the fact that you must be X/George and not Anonymous? Pretending superiority over our host is the biggest giveaway. I know you can do better.
Now to the merits. Perhaps some reading comprehension might be desirable. “[M]otor carriers with English Language Proficiency (ELP) violations were involved in DOT-recordable crashes at nearly twice the national average. That rate outpaced even those associated with speeding or drug-and-alcohol violations.”
https://san.com/cc/study-english-deficient-truckers-pose-greater-safety-risk-than-drugs-speeding/
And it seems like fellow drivers are getting tired of it as well:
https://www.datawrapper.de/_/yBLWu/
That was not me Lin.
“I know you can do better,” X.
awww, someone who got put in his place now takes it out by upvoting georgie. How cute. How hilarious.
I didn’t think it sounded like X so I liked his comment. I also liked the underlying anonymous comment because I agree with the general sentiment that Professor Turley can do better in how he presents issues in this blog.
Hi. Coming back on board for a minute before I leave. I do wish you would have addressed the MERITS of the comments, e.g., -I addressed the incorrect comment that “There have been a FEW accidents with drivers who don’t speak English? And 100s times as many with drivers who DO speak English. ”
I found several sources that crush that/said the opposite, and cited one which said, ““[M]otor carriers with English Language Proficiency (ELP) violations were involved in DOT-recordable crashes at nearly twice the national average,” even those involving “speeding or drug-and-alcohol violations.”
Let’s get back to addressing the substantive merits. You said you liked the comment. What about the factual accuracy? Thanks. (I.m signing out for now, have a good day)
Steyer is CA 3rd, yes THIRD bazillionaire, to run for governor in a “self financed” campaign. Al Checchi was first in 1998, and he broke the spending record in spectacular fashion. $50 million, but he got destroyed by Gray Savis. Meg Whitman followed in Checcjisad footsteps, but upping the record spending to $150 million, and she too got destroyed, by Edmund Moonbeam Jerry Brown. Steyer will fare no better…. Why can’t these bazillionIre morons get a clue?
I would add Michael Huffington to that list. He was able to buy a seat in Congress, but when next he tried to buy a Senate seat, he lost both seats.
My theory is that the cost of statewide office in California is always $1 more than what a bazillionaire is willing to pay. Steyer can buy the primary, but that’s as far as he’ll get.
It’s become increasingly annoying that moderators do not implement follow up questions to absurd positions that endanger Americans. In this case, the moderator could have asked if fatalities caused by illegal drivers are acceptable because they could not read road signs. The graft being accumulated for these Democrat supporting moderators will not offset the consequences of being judged when they die.
As with Charlottesville, the term “racial profiling” has its roots not in the realities of policing but in the boardroom of a leftist organization, the ACLU. It was only after failing in court to prove racism in the highly successful profiling of northbound drug runners coming up out of Florida that the ACLU went all Al Sharpton with their divisive publicity campaign.
And again, like Charlottesville, where race-baiters cherry-picked Trumps words, by taking profiling out its original context (being alert to things like young male driver, no passengers, no luggage, rented car, single key in ignition, known drug corridor, vague about destination, etc.) and then supercharging it by adding the word “racial.” And the news media ran with it, despite America’s cops having never heard of “racial profiling” (caveat: after learning of it in the news America’s obsequious police chiefs, devotees of SPLC race training, couldn’t wait to publicly announce that they would cleanse it from their agencies).
The only role race played in profiling was the acknowledgement that certain drugs are trafficked by certain racial groups, and meth-dealing whites were not left out.
Note: not to be overlooked is the horrible effect these Leftist fabrications have on young people, crushing their hopes and plans for a bright future by painting a soul-breaking picture of a country that is recognized worldwide as the land of opportunity. A true American tragedy.
If you “Babelize” people, you ultimately “Balkanize” them into hostile, protective, birds-of-a-feather, identity-driven units of a population, -separated by ethnicity, race, religion, etc.—and totally antithetical to our Constitution.
Thus, you tear apart and fragmentize our country, -and the United States becomes the Untied States.
Is that intentional?
Lin, I think you’re right to ask if this is intentional. Formation always happens either on purpose or by accident, and nothing about this looks accidental. When the same people who live off identity politics also work to Babelize our common language and then act surprised when the country Balkanizes, it is hard to treat that as a random side effect. At a minimum, they know that fractured, suspicious, Untied States are easier to manage from the top than a self‑conscious constitutional people that still shares a clear public tongue.
Olly, this country would never balkanize. In our 250 year existence multiple languages have been present. French in the bayous. Spanish in the southwest, Italian, Irish, etc on the north east. Nearly everyone came here speaking their languages before assimilating to English. Heck, even the Chinese who built the railroads.
It’s statistically shown that immigrants by the 2nd and 3rd generations end up fully assimilated.
It’s a natural progression. There’s no need to force it.
When I talk about Balkanization, I am not speculating about some future collapse. I am describing where we already are. Balkanization means taking one political people and sorting them into hostile camps along ethnic, racial, and cultural lines, until they no longer see themselves as a single “we.”
Look around at our politics, media, and streets. That is not a risk on the horizon, it is our daily reality.
And I am not calling for some new, heavy‑handed language regime. For most of our history, people came here speaking many tongues, then moved into a shared public English on purpose through schools, law, and civic life, which is exactly why second and third generations ended up fully comfortable in it.
The problem now is that we are walking away from that common civic language and treating it as suspect. The call is not to “force” something new. It is to return to the one shared tongue that used to help hold an already diverse country together, so we can start un‑Balkanizing instead of drifting further apart.
So you’re saying what republicans and Trump are doing IS balkanizing the country right now?
Because they are actively trying to force one standard by singling out immigrants and using them to emphasize the need for one strict standard.
We are not walking away from a common civic language. Our form of English has always been a mix of other languages. French, Italian, Latin, Spanish etc. Am I wrong?
The majority of city names and places in the southeast are Spanish. What should be the civic language there?
I assume you’re referring to something what the Chinese refer to as standard mandarin even though there are multiple versions of “Chinese” but an ‘American’ version. We already have that. All official government processes and communications are done in English.
Olly, isn’t X a real hoot? He will spend the day arguing the most trivial of things and we just laugh.
You asked, am I wrong, X? YES, you’re always excruciatingly WRONG! It’s like a Woody Allen movie.
Are you sure George Svelaz X isn’t from a Woody Allen movie? He is fatuous enough to be.
If you only had a brain.
Is telling people in prison “stop committing crimes” – “balkanizing the country”
Whoever is telling you to learn the primary language of the country you live in – they are giving you GOOD ADVICE.
Follow it. Don’t. But do not expect sympathy when you do not an fail.
Do a tiny number of people succeed without following sure fire route to success ? Absolutely.
If you want to bet that you are one of the .001% – you are free to do so.
But most people are not.
If you live in the US and you would like to make it into the Middle class – guaranteed.
There is a sure fire list of things that if you do you will be virtually assured of making it atleast to the middle class.
Learning to speak english if you live in the US is one of those.
As is not committing crimes.
Learning to read, write and do basic math.
Are these “racist” – of course not. In every place in the world they WILL result in better outcomes for you than if you do not.
Have you heard of the tower of Babble ?
If you chose to limit the number of people you can communicate with.
If you force the burned of communication onto others – you will not do as well.
It is a tautology that standard of living rises are more of what humans value is produced with less human effort.
The more impediments you place in the way of more efficiently producing value – the worse off you make yourself and everyone else.
If you already know english in the US – and you are working with lots of people who speak a different language – you will be more successful if you learn that language too.
In a multi-language situatition the person who speaks more than one language will be more likely to get what they want.
This is not racism – it is not reality.
If you wish to work in Japan – learn Japanese.
“We are not walking away from a common civic language.”
Of course you are.
In the US the common civic language is English.
The worse your skills at STANDARD english the less able you will be to get what you want.
” Our form of English has always been a mix of other languages. French, Italian, Latin, Spanish etc.”
So what ? English itself is a mix of other languages.
The one word that has found its way into every single language in the world – purportedly is an american indian Word
okay
Whatever your pariticular cultures dialect might eventually find its way into standard english – but NOT in the next month.
Not in the next decade.
If you want something from the world YOU must come to it. It is NOT coming to you.
If you want me to hire you, or buy from you or do business with you – YOU must communicate with me – or I am walking away.
We MIGHT both lose – though likely I can find someone who will provide me what I want and that I can communicate with
While you will likely have a harder time.
If you think otherwise – FINE – it is YOUR LIFE, YOU are the one placing the bets. It is YOUR future.
“The majority of city names and places in the southeast are Spanish. What should be the civic language there?”
Standard English – because it is. the civic language. Because the better you speak it the more likely you are to do well.
Place names are not really part of the language.
When you say I am headed to San Antonio – no on thinks you are headed to the place named after Saint Anthony in Spanish.
They think – you are headed to That city over there.
If you are planning on living in Argentina – you will do better if you learn spanish.
This is not about racism – it is about are you the person who demands accomodation from the norms or are you the one who accommodates those you want something from.
Even in the US if you expect to function in specific ethnic communities – you will do better if you learn their language and their culture.
In the US laws are written in english. 90% of all signs are exclusively in english. 90% of jobs require english.
If you can not manage that – you harm yourself.
Speak whatever you want in your family, among your friends, in your community.
But outside of that – if you expect others to adapt to you – you are the one who will lose oportunites.
I would further note that in the US successful immigrant cultures emphasized education – including learning english as the way to provide their kids a better future.
That has not changed.
Those of you on the left constantly expect everyone else to accommodate you.
You are free to do so – but when you do. you reduce your own opportunities.
This is NOT just about english.
I do not care how you dress, I do not care how you identify. I do not care what your pronouns are.
But if you make ME accommodate YOUR fetishes – I may decide you are more trouble than your worth, and just ignore you.
Maybe you are the best person for the job I have. But if you make it difficult for me to hire you – I will never find out.
I WILL end up hiring someone – and even if not as good as you – they will in all likelihood be “good enough:”
But you may not get hired at all.
This is not about race, or sex, or gender. It is not specific to the US or english. Nor is it absolute – but smart people do not bet constantly against the odds.
The official language of China is Mandarin. It has been that way for centuries.
When I went to LianJaing to adopt my daughter the local Cantonese was translated to mandarin and then to my wife and I in english.