Whose idea was it that the Republican presidential candidates have a Spanish-spoken debate?
Obviously it was an attempt to woo Latino voters, at the same time, make an attempt to quell the perceived bashing “immigrants” are taking nowadays.
After Sunday night’s debate, the media has taken many angles on this attempt. Some consider the olive branch a noble gesture, while some have taken the opportunity to lecture the GOP about our nation’s strong Spanish-speaking heritage, while reminding us of the strides Latinos have made to master America’s official tongue.
Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo avoided the trap altogether by boycotting Sunday night’s event hosted by Univision, the Spanish language television network, and the University of Miami. Univision anchors Jorge Ramos and Maria Elena Salinas translated the questions and comments into English for the candidates.
With that, is there any clearer illustration of the cultural divide?
Now that we’ve had a Spanish language debate, when’s the next scheduled debate for Chinese speaking Americans, or the Armenian-as-a-second-language debate, or the Tagalog-English debate?
That’s been my problem, all along, with this whole bilingual America thing. The “bi” in bilingual implies there are two languages in the United States, whereas in reality, there are many, many others. The difference here is in the very notion of pandering. Not cosmetically by Republicans in the debate, but by liberals in our society.
Who decided that English and Spanish would define “bilingual” in America? Many other immigrants came to America and mastered the English language. They gladly immersed their children in American schools that didn’t speak their native tongues. Their children seemed to get it. Who decided that Spanish-speaking people were too dumb to learn English, thus this grandiose attempt to make things easier for them?
Who decided when calling businesses or government agencies today, we could dial “two” to hear the message in Spanish, or stay on the line for the next available customer service representative? Who decided that publications and advertisements for public dissemination had to be written in English and Spanish? Who decided it was okay to leave out the French and Koreans?
Who decided that Republicans reaching out to Latinos had to be done in Spanish because Latinos were too stupid to understand the words put forth by someone who may well be the next President of the United States?
I really don’t think it was a conservative.
If those presidential candidates were paying attention, they’d know that sixty percent of voters in California chose “yes” on California’s Proposition 187, the 1994 ballot initiative offered to deny illegal immigrants social services, health care, and public education. That sixty percent included Latinos, some of who are obviously tired of the pandering that suggests they’re second-class citizens.
The very standards of what it means (and takes) to be an American has been seemingly suspended for Latinos. This has created a huge crutch for them, while creating resentment by Americans whose ancestors took the time to learn English. Coupled with the mass demonstrations of Latinos against American efforts to secure our borders, this effort to reach out appears one-sided at best.
These efforts to pander to the Latino vote are a slap in the face to all those who took the time to learn English and assimilate into American society. This effort is a token one. It’s being reported as such, and will be seen by many as hollow.
What we, as Americans, should be expecting of those who legally enter our society is a willingness to embrace all that is America. We’re not such a bad people, seeing how more people seek entry here every day. What we, as Americans, should be expecting of those who legally enter our society is a willingness to join us in one language. Those who divide us, do so intentionally, and without a common launching-off point (such as a common language), are successful when we can be segregated by class: those who can excel by fluid participation in our daily commerce, and those who cannot and are forced to live a life of menial sub servitude.
This is by design.
We, as Republicans, expect more from our workers, our soldiers, our women, and our children. Latinos should be looked upon no differently. Every other immigrant group watches presidential debates in our official language, and can make educated decisions accordingly. We must expect no less from our Latino brethren. To do so is insulting, and the debate pandering is just that: insulting.
Tom Tancredo gets it. Hopefully, America will too soon.
Bob Parks is a member/writer for the National Advisory Council of Project 21, Senior Writer for the New Media Journal, VP of Marketing and Media Relations/Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, and VP of the Massachusetts Republican Assembly, and commentator for the Intel Radio Network.
