Rick's Hispanic Pandering

Not!

My work schedule has prevented me from blogging and it'll be sparse here for the next week or so, but I had to chime on Rick Santorum's trip to Puerto Rico this week.

According to a Spanish translation of the interview posted on El Vocero’s Web site, Santorum responded that “as in any other state, (Puerto Rico) should comply with this and every other federal law -- and that is that English must be the main language.”

Now, not only is Santorum being what can be described as bigoted when it comes to the issue of the English language, but what I take the most offense to is the notion that somewhere in our Constitution, he thinks there is a federal law that states English must be the main language for territories applying for statehood.
In his defense, the Santorum campaign is claiming he was misquoted and didn't say that English should be the "only" language, but that is a lame excuse. The subject shouldn't even have been broached. I'll even take Rick at his word and substitute "only" to "main" or "primary." It's still a dumbass thing to say or think.

A proud cultural heritage and tradition are things Hispanics in general have strong feelings about. For Rick to dismiss a language they've been speaking almost 300 years before the birth of the United States is a callous, insensitive and bigoted thought.

And I say bigoted because a Santorum spokesman said...

“In Puerto Rico, Rick would encourage people to speak English in addition to Spanish because English is the language of opportunity in America,” he added.

The language of opportunity? I disagree, Rick. Opportunity, as far as language is concerned, may come from the advantage of being bilingual or multi-lingual. But to think you have an advantage because you speak English as opposed to multiple languages is, oh I don't know... elitist?

Way to go, immediately alienating the Puerto Rican/Hispanic vote. What a snob!

A Must MUST Read

I've never done this before, but I thought this post from Miami Herald political columnist Joy Reid was so good, I'd link it here. I've argued this point before, but never could have put it so well as Reid does here.

Barack Obama and the myth of the progressive ‘majorities’

...Despite the myth-making on the left, Democrats actually held their tenuous 60-vote majority for only five months in 2009: from July of that year, when Al Franken was finally sworn in after winning the recount against Norm Coleman, through November 2009, when Democrats lost Barack Obama’s old Senate seat in Illinois to Mark Kirk. Then in a special election the following January, Scott Brown won Teddy Kennedy’s old seat, and was sworn in on February 4th.

Could Barack Obama have somehow rammed through the entire progressive wish list in five months? I find it hard to see how, given the unreliability of the blue dog Senators.

Ben Nelson Hides Behind Constituents On Kagan Vote

What a cowardly, little simp.

Ben Nelson (DINO-NE): “As a member of the bipartisan ‘Gang of 14,’ I will follow our agreement that judicial nominees should be filibustered only under extraordinary circumstances. If a cloture vote is held on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, I am prepared to vote for cloture and oppose a filibuster because, in my view, this nominee deserves an up or down vote in the Senate.

“However, I have heard concerns from Nebraskans regarding Ms. Kagan, and her lack of a judicial record makes it difficult for me to discount the concerns raised by Nebraskans, or to reach a level of comfort that these concerns are unfounded. Therefore, I will not vote to confirm Ms. Kagan’s nomination.”

Did Ben Nelson consult his constituents (especially the ones out of work) when he voted against extending unemployment benefits? Or does he not care about them because Nebraska is well below the national average? Did Nelson consult his constituents when he voted for permanently extending the Bush tax cuts that would effectively add over $3 TRILLION to the debt?

Ben, don't expect us to believe you listen to your fellow Nebraskans when it comes to your votes. You're transparently in the pocket of big business and couldn't give a shit about your constituents. Just switch parties and get it over with already.

(H/T Bob Cesca)

Senate GOP Forces New House Vote

And there you have it. Senate Republicans were able to sneak in two provisions that change the reconciliation bill enough to have to send it back to the house for yet another vote. Luckily, it seems that it won't make much difference.

In the wee hours of Thursday morning, Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin ruled that two minor provisions of the health care reconciliation bill violated the so-called Byrd rule, and must be stricken. That has altered the language of the legislation and will the House to vote on the package one more time.

One of the provisions is meant to prevent Pell grant reductions (the reconciliation bill also deals with student loan reform). The other strike came against obsolete language. Both changes are incidental to the overall package, though, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is expected to have no problem passing the bill again with the same coalition of 220 members who passed it for the first time on Sunday.

House members have been told to stay in town for a reconciliation revote, in the event that the Senate adopts the bill with a few changes. The Senate adjourned after 2 this morning, without having taken a final vote. They'll reconvene this morning at 9:45 to resume consideration.

Of course all of this is really moot and for some reason, the GOP thinks delaying the inevitable seems like a smart tactic. Stopping work at 2pm? Forcing committees to reconvene at a later time midstream? Proposing ridiculous amendments like Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn's "No Viagra for Sex Offenders" in order to force Democrats into a tough vote.

If Coburn is so adamant about this, why doesn't he introduce it as a stand alone bill?  Let's see if he does after the GOP plan to derail the reconciliation vote fails.  Then we can all call him and ask why he hasn't followed up with his Viagra bill?