My problem has to do with a law that has no impact on society. Laws, by their very nature reduce the freedom for society to change in some fashion. Therefore, if we are going to pass a law that restricts freedom, there should be some tangible benefit. There should be some real effect.

However, most pundits, politicans and commentators I’ve heard have clearly stated that this law will not change anything about our society. In the NPR report I heard, one Rep stated that it was Symbolic. Statues, Walls, Memorials, and large Banners are good for symbols. Laws, on the other hand, tend to make poor symbols.

If there is going to be a law, then there should be some tangible purpose for it. If the law is going to make all ATM’s and phone systems use only English, then fine… if its going to reqire that all students in all schools learn English as their primary language, then ok. However, if the law is going to have no effect, whatsoever, then I think its foolish, a waste of our money and nothing more than laws for the sake of political points.

And that, I can honestly say I disagree with.

Official second language? No. Had that been proposed in 1820 or so, the language would probably have been German (Penn Dutch): nothing wrong with the language, but how relevant is it today?

It seems to me that the disagreement over a comprehensive solution is mainly about whether to do everything at once or prove that we can control the borders before embarking on any path to citizenship or guest worker programs.

Why are the Democrats opposed to doing it in sequence rather than all at once? Do they really think they are going to get points from the electorate in November for supporting the what the other side is calling amnesty before we have demonstrated that we can control the borders? The two reasons voters will come out in November are the war and illegal immigration. If there is still of flood of illegals crossing the border in November those politicians who were soft on border and interior enforcement are going to suffer. And that apparently includes all Democrats and the Bush Republicans who support corporate interests.

Michael, my elementary school (a public school in Glastonbury, CT for the record) mandated that children take courses in either French or Spanish (they were offered in alternate years)…over forty years ago!

Was my school so far ahead of the times? or has education deteriorated so much since then? or (no insult intended) is this a lack of awareness.

It’s not the interest, particularly, it’s the opportunity. As has been pointed out, it is impossible to become fluent in a language unless you have to use it. If, as was pointed out, you can drive through 3 to 5 countries in a day the odds are pretty good you’ll need to be bilingual (or more). Even if American’s learn a second language in school where and when are they going to practice it? I took 3 years of German in high school (being from a long line of Krauts) and had no need for it until I joined a German company 30 years later. Ooops, everyone there SPEAKS ENGLISH! No multi-national company can exist without the vast majority of the employees speaking English.

My father-in-law is a flaming LLL moonbat, as you would expect from someone who is a lifetime resident and “Educator” of Mass. Even HE claims that teaching foreign languages in high school is a waste of time for this reason and insists that what is needed is better ENGLISH teaching. While a LLL politically, when it comes to education he’s a real old time conservative.

Having said that, I support the idea of English as the official language, if only because of the example of Quebec and the utter absurdity of getting a message in Spanish telling me to press 1 for English. I’ve nothing against Hispanics, the Spanish language, or anything else, but I grew up in an English speaking country, took French and German in High School, and just plain don’t know or need to know Spanish. I spent more time in Holland than I did in Mexico, and I don’t know one single word of Dutch…

It would be better if English became our official language, all government business was conducted only in English, and businesses were free to do what they like to serve their customers.

There’s the real lefty logic coming out. A prominent Senator of the Democratic persuasion calls a legislative act that the majority of Americans support a racist act (at the same time insulting his friend Sen. Inhoff).

So Senator Reid’s knee-jerk race mongering –at a time when we are trying to sort out the illegal immigration is just the same as holding a position about bi-lingual education. I suppose flying the American flag upside down and proposing to take back Aztlan is just the same as debating Social Security identity theft.

Too bad there isn’t some statemanship in the Senate. Shame –there isn’t leadership among the out of power party that doesn’t reflexively term any policy decision racially motivated. Maybe that’s why they are out of power.

Dubya is NOT just as bad as race whoring Senator Reid.

It makes us less tribal.