Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who received heaps of praise after her last Democratic primary debate performance, which skyrocketed her to a third place finish in the New Hampshire primary, made a rather bold and controversial statement on Thursday night, saying English should no longer be the primary language of the United States.
Interestingly, her new stance is in complete contrast to a bill she voted for in 2007 called the English-language amendment, which undid a Clinton-era executive order that required government papers to be offered in a variety of languages other than English.
The 2020 candidate attempted to defend her reversal and argue why English should no longer be the primary language in the U.S.
“I think that when you look at a state like this state, and a country like ours that is so diverse, you don’t want to have that provision in law because then it would be very difficult to have, say, government documents and other things translated into other languages,” Klobuchar said Friday, according to the AP. “So that is not a position I take. I did vote that way, but way back then, along with many other people.”
Klobuchar’s timing of her new stance on the English language is convenient — as she made the statement during a campaign stop in Las Vegas, Nevada, which will hold its caucuses on Saturday, February 22. It’s also home to a large demographic of Latino voters. READ Joe Biden Says He’s In Favor Of Banning Plastic Straws
Right now, according to Breibart, Klobuchar has about 10 percent support among Latinos in the area, so taking a jab at English as the official language of the United States, especially given her history of flip-flopping on the matter, is textbook pandering.
The Minnesota senator made headlines over the weekend after she failed to name the president of Mexico after a reporter from Telemundo asked her if she knew his name, to which she replied, “No.”
#1: Darkwing To: Horse (#0)
Darkwing posted on 2020-02-18 15:23:32 Reply Private Reply
#2: GreyLmist To: Horse (#0)
GreyLmist posted on 2020-02-18 19:04:36 Reply Private Reply
#3: BTP Holdings To: Darkwing (#1)
Yes and the cry during the Revolution was, "No King but King Jesus." ;)
BTP Holdings posted on 2020-02-18 19:12:41 Reply Private Reply
#4: Esso To: Darkwing (#1)
Can't argue with that. (Especially the bitch part)
Esso posted on 2020-02-18 19:36:32 Reply Private Reply
#5: Esso To: BTP Holdings (#3)
Never read that one.
Esso posted on 2020-02-18 19:37:31 Reply Private Reply
#6: BTP Holdings To: Esso (#5)
Oh yes. King George III was the British monarch. He was the source of all the tyranny imposed on the colonies.
Do you know what the Constitutional Convention was in 1789? The British were counterfeiting Colonial Script which made it worthless.
The Con Con was a reorganization under international Bankruptcy law.
The Con Con was convened ostensibly to rewrite the Articles of Confederation. But that idea was scrapped for a new Constitution. We can thank James Madison for his notes on the Convention. Without those notes most of what went on during those meetings would be lost for all time.
When the final document was presented for approval, several of the new prospective states refused to sign without a Bill of Rights. The led to the first 10 Amendments.
And the new form of government has stood the test of time. ;)
BTP Holdings posted on 2020-02-18 21:36:39 Reply Private Reply
#7: BTP Holdings To: Horse (#0)
The Dutch were the first to colonize New York. Maybe we should have Dutch as the official language.
Then maybe Dutch Boy paints will take their place among best sellers again. ;)
BTP Holdings posted on 2020-02-18 21:43:56 Reply Private Reply
#8: Lod To: BTP Holdings (#6)
And that's where they screwed up in 200+ years of hindsight.
Lod posted on 2020-02-18 22:22:50 Reply Private Reply
#9: BTP Holdings To: Lod (#8)
Alexander Hamilton was one of the authors of The Federalist Papers which advocated for a strong Federal government.
Alas, he was killed in a duel with Aaron Burr in 1804. ;)
BTP Holdings posted on 2020-02-19 07:23:05 Reply Private Reply