Iowa Aviation Weather...en Espanol

C J Campbell writes:

You must believe that America has become weak indeed if it can no longer
tolerate what has been the situation since its inception. I suspect that the
problem is more that we now have better communication in the country, and a
lot of folks who live in what were relatively isolated, English speaking,
farming communities are suddenly discovering that the rest of America is not
like that. And they don't like it.

What is actually happened is that the country has shifted from the notion of
personal responsibility to a deluded ideal of a Great Society in which nobody
need take any responsibility for his own actions or destiny.

Early immigrants adapted by learning the predominant language. Successful
immigrants today still do that. But lazy immigrants, and certain other groups
that have a vested interest in isolating these immigrants, refuse to
assimilate.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

I sincerely doubt that. Yes, English is more dominant now than it was when
you were born, but now it is losing a little of that dominance. You need to
get out of Iowa once in awhile. Visit Washington, D.C., or New Mexico, or
Puerto Rico. We have managed to hold this country together for more than two
centuries despite the fact that so many languages are spoken in it. I suspect
it will continue for a few more.

We have never before in our history had a government that REQUIRED
bilingualism. We have always tolerated multiple languages, because we
are *all* immigrants -- but the difference now is that all of us are
being forced to pay for another set of immigrants who are apparently
incapable of comprehending English.

You must believe that America has become weak indeed if it can no longer
tolerate what has been the situation since its inception.

See above. We have never had governement-mandated bilingualism.
Ever. What bilingualism existed was like Milwaukee (German) or San
Francisco (Chinese), and was paid for BY THE IMMIGRANTS THEMSELVES.

Huge difference.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 15:56:58 -0800, Jay Honeck wrote
(in article .com):

I sincerely doubt that. Yes, English is more dominant now than it was when
you were born, but now it is losing a little of that dominance. You need to
get out of Iowa once in awhile. Visit Washington, D.C., or New Mexico, or
Puerto Rico. We have managed to hold this country together for more than two
centuries despite the fact that so many languages are spoken in it. I
suspect
it will continue for a few more.

We have never before in our history had a government that REQUIRED
bilingualism. We have always tolerated multiple languages, because we
are *all* immigrants -- but the difference now is that all of us are
being forced to pay for another set of immigrants who are apparently
incapable of comprehending English.

You must believe that America has become weak indeed if it can no longer
tolerate what has been the situation since its inception.

See above. We have never had governement-mandated bilingualism.
Ever. What bilingualism existed was like Milwaukee (German) or San
Francisco (Chinese), and was paid for BY THE IMMIGRANTS THEMSELVES.

Huge difference.

Well, not really. I think they have always spoken Spanish in Puerto Rico. New
Mexico had a bilingual law in their original constitution. Come on, Jay. This
is KKK stuff you're spouting. And I know you don't believe in that.

This is a freedom issue -- free trade and free men. Walls and restrictions
have never been good for business. The country hasn't had this much
protectionist sentiment since the Smoot/Hawley Tariff Act. We don't want to
revisit that again, do we?

If it helps to keep money flowing smoothly and makes life a little easier for
some people, I really don't have a problem with multi-lingual weather
briefings. Really, Jay, this is a business asset. It makes it easier for
people who don't speak English to visit Iowa, stay at your hotel, eat your
food, and so forth. Are you really telling me you don't have anything to
offer them, that you can't make a buck off this?

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

"CJ" == C J Campbell C writes:
CJ Come on, Jay. This is KKK stuff you're
CJ spouting. And I know you don't believe in that.

Uh--and how do you know he doesn't believe in that?

Every few weeks Jay posts some utterly off-topic crap here that
invariably reveals his narrow and often bigoted beliefs. It's always
some disadvantaged group (the working poor, hispanics) that's going to
run this country to hell in a handbasket.

Every time I've visited the midwest or south I run into people who are
racists right below the surface. They must think I'm safe to talk to
because within minutes they start blaming any incident in town on the
blacks, or mexicans, or whatever group they don't like. It's
something you rarely encounter in California. Most of our bigots have
moved to Idaho I think. Or maybe Iowa, I dunno.
--
Contrary to what most people say, the most dangerous animal in
the world is not the lion or the tiger or even the elephant. It's
a shark riding on an elephant's back, just trampling and eating
everything they see.
- Jack Handey

C J Campbell writes:

Well, not really. I think they have always spoken Spanish in Puerto Rico.

So they weren't bilingual, were they?

This is a freedom issue -- free trade and free men.

Freedom implies responsibility. Those who refuse to take responsibility for
their own destinies cannot complain about a lack of freedom.

Walls and restrictions have never been good for business.

So a requirement for bilingualism must not be good for business.

If it helps to keep money flowing smoothly and makes life a little easier for
some people, I really don't have a problem with multi-lingual weather
briefings.

It doesn't. People who can't speak English are likely to be illiterate in
Spanish as well, and they aren't likely to have much in the way of PCs or
Internet access.

It makes it easier for
people who don't speak English to visit Iowa, stay at your hotel, eat your
food, and so forth.

No, it doesn't. For that, _everything_ would have to be in Spanish (and
they'd have to be able to read).

Are you really telling me you don't have anything to
offer them, that you can't make a buck off this?

The potential revenue is far too small to justify the cost.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Well, not really. I think they have always spoken Spanish in Puerto Rico. New
Mexico had a bilingual law in their original constitution. Come on, Jay. This
is KKK stuff you're spouting. And I know you don't believe in that.

Is this some new variation on the "Hitler Rule"?

Once you start accusing someone of belonging to the KKK, the
opportunity for intelligent discussion is over.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 04:47:24 -0800, Jay Honeck wrote
(in article . com):

Would you call Lakota a foreign language in the US?


But one must be decided upon and adhered to, officially, or America is
doomed to become Yugoslavia.


No. Intolerance created Yugoslavia's problems. You decide that somebody who
speaks a different language or who has a different religion is no longer
worthy to be allowed to do that or to live next door to you despite the fact
that his ancestors have for centuries -- well, when you decide that then what
separates you from Milosevic? I really hope we have learned better than that.



--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

What will doom the US to the Yugoslavia model is the bigotry of its
citizens, not the languages they use.
--
It's easy to sit there and say you'd like to have more money. And
I guess that's what I like about it. It's easy. Just sitting
there, rocking back and forth, wanting that money
- Jack Handey

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
Would you call Lakota a foreign language in the US?

In the context of modern-day America, and this conversation, of
course.

Then in what country is Lakota a native language?
(You'd think a proponent of the English language would at least use it
properly!)

Really, I don't care WHAT language is mandated. Hell, let's use
Sioux, if you want.

But one must be decided upon and adhered to, officially, or America is
doomed to become Yugoslavia.

If the U.S. government makes more than one language "official" then the
U.S. is more likely "doomed" to become like Switzerland or Canada. (Hint:
What are the official languages of Switzerland and Canada?)

In article . com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Would you call Lakota a foreign language in the US?

In the context of modern-day America, and this conversation, of
course.

Amazing. A language spoken continuously by indigenous US citizens in the
US and that long predates the use of English in the US is "foreign"? As
with Jim M., I'm guessing that for you the phrase "foreign language"
means something like "non-official language", or "non-dominant
language", or "language I don't speak", or "language some foreigners
use", rather than what the phrase might mean to many of the rest of us,
something like "a language not spoken by the indigenous peoples of a
certain area" (to steal a definition from somewhere else)?

Yours is a very ... *odd* ... definition of foreign language, to be sure.


Really, I don't care WHAT language is mandated. Hell, let's use
Sioux, if you want.

If we used Sioux in the United States for that purpose would it suddenly
make English foreign in the US?


But one must be decided upon and adhered to, officially, or America is
doomed to become Yugoslavia.

What an ironic thing to say...

Hamish