Pre-July 4 special: “English only” video insults U.S. flag

Okay. I’ve had five or six people send me links to a YouTube video of Ron and Kay Rivoli singing “Press One for English.” Ha. Ha.

It’s a rant about language accommodations. Some Americans, free marketeers for the most part, get all buggy when confronted with a free market in language choices. America is becoming more global, marketing more goods in more places, and getting visited by more people. This growth in commerce brings things like American Airlines’ Spanish language reservations center (Who would have thought? When they can make reservations in Spanish, Spanish speakers buy a lot more airplane tickets.)

And Ron and Kay Rivoli put these fears into a song. Funny.

Can we talk? Can I pick a bone? Ron and Kay Rivoli insult the U.S. flag. They may not mean to do it, they may have done it unthinkingly — but that’s the problem with the whole rant: It’s all unthinking.

Here are the flag insults:

  1. 44 seconds into the video three servicemen are shown saluting the U.S. flag, displayed with the flag of California and the POW-MIA flag. Contrary to the Flag Code and good flag etiquette, the U.S. flag is in the center, rather than to its own right. A center display would be acceptable if the center flag pole were higher than the others — but in this case the U.S. flag’s pole is lower than the other two. Two flag insults at once.
  2. At 2:59 into the video, the flag is shown as cut into an agricultural field of some kind. The Flag Code specifies that the flag is never to be displayed flat. The flag should fly free. Since this flag is cut into a crop on the ground, it cannot be displayed properly. Further, it is generally considered poor etiquette to make representations of the flag out of things other than cloth.

This is all highly ironic. At 1:37 into the video, a scroll of the famous Theodore Roosevelt quote on English as the only language scrolls by. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag,” Roosevelt said (oops — there goes the POW-MIA flag). “We have room but for one language, and that is the English language,” Roosevelt continues.

They use the flag they insult as a model for going for one language? This makes no sense.

Do I pick nits? No, I think that every educated American should know the flag code, and should avoid insult to the U.S. flag at least, if not honor it correctly. I am not pedantic about a lot of things, but this is one.

Ron and Kay Rivoli, you owe America and its flag apologies. Get straight with the flag, before you ask me to insult the traditional languages and free enterprise heritage of our nation. If you want my support, don’t tread on the American flag when you ask it.

The Rivolis owe apologies to the U.S. flag. Will we see it?

89 Responses to Pre-July 4 special: “English only” video insults U.S. flag

  1. Ellie says:

    Just an aside, Ed: the book I recommended isn’t a grammar book, although there are quite a few of those. It’s a story about English as a language; how it arose, how it evolved, and how it is spreading all over the world as the lingua franca. Any of Lynn Truss’s books on grammar are recommended, even those she wrote for children. They are both educational and entertaining.

    The FBI offices where I live don’t display the flag properly either. I’ve complained, and am probably now on some List, but they haven’t changed anything in front of the office.


  2. Ed Darrell says:

    Generally, the idea of perspective tells us that objects closer will appear larger. Can you explain how it is that the U.S. flag was raised on a pole closer to the camera that appeared smaller than the others? Illusion indeed — a new illusion, never before seen.

    Can you show me in the flag code where flat displays are proper? I’ve already given you a couple of references to flag display etiquette, from federal law and from the American Legion. Here’s another; see especially page 7:

    Can you give me any good reason that the obnoxious, rude claim of the video should be called anything other than what it is?

    If you don’t wish to speak the language that the business prefers with its “please press 1” indication, bank with Frost.

    Please take Ellie up on her suggestion of a grammar book. You’ll find it entertaining, and useful.

    There is another old saw: “You cannot use reason to persuade a person away from a view he did not get to by reason.”

    But I’m happy you dropped by express your opinion anyway, no matter how you came by it.

    Thanks again for your service.


  3. Ellie says:

    Dear Bro. Ignatius Mary,

    I’m sorry your grandmother thought so little of herself. That is truly heartbreaking — that a woman would compare herself to someone who is mentally ill simply because that woman was female. Me, I’m both female and Liberal, and am rarely irrational although frequently irascible the older I get.

    Since you profess a love of the English language, perhaps you would be interested in a book I just read and enjoyed very much. It is The English is Coming!: How One Language is Sweeping the World by Leslie Dunton-Downer. You may find reviews on Amazon as well as many other places.


  4. Bro. Ignatius Mary says:

    The only thing in that video that even remotely violates any rules is the flag design in the field.

    The scene where it appears the US flag is lower than the other flags is an optical illusion due to the camera angle. Get over it.

    The Roosevelt quote is not saying that no other flag is possible. If that were true then we could not have state flags.

    If you cannot see this, then you really have a problem.

    In addition, even with the scene of the flag in the field, to accuse the Rivoli’s of disrespect and needing to apologize is asinine.

    Fella, you are what is called scrupulous. This is a form of obsessive-compulsive disorder. That is fine, but when your obsessiveness insults others it is not fine.

    And, what is this “I presume that you are a Vietnam vet (and not the film, as your post implies).” Uh?

    My post does not imply that I am a film, for pete sake. I think you need to take a course in English grammar.

    We do not speak English as a convenience. English is the native language of this country in the exact same way French is native to France.

    In Vietnam, by the say, Vietnamese is the native language.

    Your logic is that of a 14 year old. But, that is to be expected.

    My grandmother use to say “Son, never argue with a liberal, a woman, a teenager, or a crazy person as they are all irrational.”

    Thus, this ends. I have some grown-ups to talk to.


  5. Ed Darrell says:

    You know, it would be a lot easier if businesses simply had a human answer the phone, like Frost Bank of Texas. That way, no one need punch any number to get the language they need.

    Customer service works, businesses. Pay attention.


  6. Ed Darrell says:

    Dear Bro. Ignatius Mary,

    Here, take a look at the rules:

    And here:

    And here:—-000-.html

    If you’ve got some flag etiquette guide that says contrary to U.S. law, it’s in error.

    I presume that you are a Vietnam vet (and not the film, as your post implies). Thanks for your service. I’m sure you don’t like it when someone says that you shouldn’t have fought to defend the Vietnamese because they speak something other than English. Same thing applies here.

    In the U.S. we speak English as a convenience, not by law. We are not the French, with laws that require culture be sacrosanct. We are not a totalitarian state that presumes to stop all threats to our nation by oppressing culture, especially by oppressing the native languages of Americans. We are a polyglot people with more than a couple million people speaking each of 14 languages. That’s one of the great things about America.

    As to the Teddy Roosevelt quote, take it up with the Rivolis. They cited it (I haven’t even sourced it). Teddy Roosevelt was a lot of things, including brave and patriotic. But he wasn’t infallible. He was fluent in a couple of languages, but he thought it important to have an education system that helped assimilate immigrants into American economic life. Since TR’s time, we have discovered that suppression of language frustrates the goal of assimilating immigrants. Let’s not cut off TR’s nose to spite anyone’s face.

    Thanks again for defending us.


  7. Bro. Ignatius Mary says:

    Oh, by the way, there is not a single violation of flag protocol in this video. The first instance you site is an obvious issue of camera angle. The second instance of the field is a minor point.

    Your comment about the Roosevelt quote and thus we can’t have the POW/MIA flag is utter immaturity and disingenuous. Are you 14?


  8. Bro. Ignatius Mary says:

    As a Vietnam Vet and a patriot, this video does not insult the flag. You insult the American people with this nonsense post.

    By the way, no other country in the world must one dial one for their native language.

    Those companies where we must dial one for English actually discriminate against all ethnic groups other than Hispanic since the only other option is Spanish.

    But, the point of the song is that English is the language of the U.S., thus immigrants need to learn the English language. Every country in the world requires an immigrant to learn their language.

    The problem in the U.S on this is a result of progressive liberals in their typical non-thinking and no-IQ views.


  9. Ed Darrell says:

    If you’re talking about France, yeah, it probably has a bit of French chauvinism in it — learn their language, you snob! It’s really odd hearing someone who claims to be a patriotic American defend some of the worst of French bias.

    But there are other things their being stuck on one language might mean:

    1. It might mean they don’t have the sophisticated phone systems we have, and they can’t use automation. It’s less so now than when I used to have to worry about it for international corporations, but the fact is that the landline telephone system in much of Europe is years behind the U.S. They have to use people to answer the phone because they can’t use machines.
    2. Of course, that means their humans can direct calls much better. My experience was that whenever someone answered the phone in Europe, when they heard me speaking English they switched to English. I personally think using a human is much more effective. It’s difficult if call volume is high, but more expensive. Europeans lay it all over U.S. companies on pure customer service like that. I think it would be best if we abandoned the machines completely — but just try to find receptionists fluent in two or three languages here.
    3. It may mean that the markets you frequent in Europe are not as progressive and dynamic as U.S. markets. A lot of corporations have found it advantageous to locate in Los Angeles because communities in that area present no fewer than 15 different markets of sizable populations of different language speakers. So it may mean that their businesses just don’t have the market reach our businesses do.


  10. Joe says:

    I travel all over the world and when I pick up the phone not in one of those countries do I hear a voice ever asking me to press 1 for their native language and 2 for English. Does that mean they do not welcome Americans? Does that mean they are predjudiced against us? I think it means it’s their country and WE have to learn THEIR language if we want to stay there!


  11. FENWICK says:

    Well, all of you bleedin’ hearted, liberal xenophiles, it’s probably just a matter of time until you’ll have to “PRESS TWO FOR ENGLISH.”


  12. Mr G says:

    Do you mean it’s over? Estefania comes out of the closet and declares he’s a collage student on a mission…LOL…Good thing though, the heat he was getting from Mr k and the English teacher was enough to cause his computer to self-destruct…Kudos to the players for being good sports. Este, if you’re still out there, give us an update sometime on your project. Good luck on future ventures… g


  13. Nick Kelsier says:

    My apologies to Mr. B for the error on my part.


  14. Estefania says:

    Hi Nick, loved your last posting…You are obviously versed in the area of immigration and things in general and I hope to be as accomplished myself someday. I am taking a course (U.S. Citizenship & Immigration) at the local community collage, I am part of a work study group and was tasked to find a posting on the Internet to respond to, the idea was to use “trigger” words to get a hot debate (rant) going, I think you and I accomplished that very well, and hope to get an “A” on my report, even though I lost the debate :~) . I will use excerpts from some of the postings in my class report (no names) and yours will dominate. I apologize to anyone that took offense to my rants, it was just part of the project. The weed smoking comment was just a pun. Nick you’re definitely a stand-up guy and had my pants on fire, I appreciate your input… Take care…EB


  15. Mr. B says:

    The person who posted after me as “Mr B”: I am not Nick, and if you would follow the link in my name at my previous link, you would find my blog where I post about my own teaching (there’s even verifiable information there, if you know how to look).

    I don’t know what part of “Google” you didn’t understand

    I understood both parts, but that doesn’t mean that the two parts made any sense together in the context of what you said. This is what happens when you Google “the Internet”.

    “tus feo” just kidding

    Was that an attempt to call me ugly in Spanish? If so, it was remarkably deficient.

    you are probably a good teacher that’s smoking to much weed and feel the need to give unsolicited advice occasionally

    What clever speculation, but no, I’ve never smoked anything (legal or otherwise) in my life. Additionally, it’s pretty ironic that you would talk about unsolicited advice given that 1) this is a blog, so comments are “solicited” pretty much by virtue of being open to the public, 2) I didn’t even proffer any advice but rather comments on your statements, and 3) you were giving advice in the same forum, so you’ve also managed to cut down your own statements. Bravo for that stunning triple play.


  16. Nick Kelsier says:

    Oh, forgot one thing. Este, you may want to bother to remember the fact that the United States has been multilingual from the start. What? You think the German immigrants that founded my hometown spoke English? You think the hispanics that were living in California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado before those areas were even states in the Union were speaking English? Or that all the Native Americans started talking english when Jamestown was founded?

    Exactly how stupid are you?


  17. Nick Kelsier says:

    Mr. B wrote:
    Re: To the “supposedly” English teacher w/a fair amount of Spanish that didn’t post his/her name (I know it’s you Nick

    If that is directed to me, Mr. B. I am not an english teacher nor did I ever claim to be. Nor do I smoke weed nor have I ever smoked weed. In fact I can quite honestly say I’ve never been drunk or high in my life.

    And as for youm Estenia, to become a citizen in this country yes you do have to learn english. You however, also have to live in this country for a period of time and unless you’re dimwitted enough to think that a person learns english at the snap of a finger that means that legal residents trying to become citizens have to have things in their native language for a time until they do learn english. What? If you moved to Bhutan you’d expect them to all start talking English so you didn’t have to learn Dzongkha, Nepalise or Tibetan? Or would you just automatically somehow know those languages? Because that is what you seem to be assuming. That once someone crosses the border of the United States that they somehow, by some act of God, know english.

    The one that needs counseling is you. Because you’ve let your hatred and your racism cloud your judgement.

    Notice, you moron, I didn’t say “legal citizens.” I said “legal immigrants.” That means, in the example I was giving, people who are here legally who are trying to become citizens. You know..people who are here on VISA’s.

    The United States does not suffer by being multi-lingual and there is no need to make english the official language. De facto it already is. And any moronic attempt to enforce a “we only speak English” here only hurts the United States. We are not the only country on the planet. And when an business person, for example, goes to do business in China it would be a very good idea if the person had some actual knowledge of at least some of the languages of China. Same goes for the rest of the world.

    Unless of course you’re saying that you think the citizens of the United States are too stupid to be multi-lingual?

    Yes, it is better to remain quiet then open your mouth and prove yourself a fool. So why did you open your mouth and prove yourself not only a fool but an racist idiot to boot?

    Tell me…when you’re not pretending that you’re a counselor or a legal scholar do you wear a tiny little mustache and march around in jack boots? Or do you simply wear a white robe and a hood and burn crosses?

    Consider this my freebie to you. The next time you act so stupidly I guarantee you if you thought I was mean and proved you an idiot this time, this time is going to seem like a walk in the park compared to how much an idiot I’ll prove you next time.

    Sorry, I’m not like what you view as typical Democrats and liberals. I don’t cower and go “please don’t hurt me.” You take a swing at me, Estefania, I am going to swing back. So don’t play games you simply don’t have the intelligence to win.


  18. Mr B says:

    Re: To the “supposedly” English teacher w/a fair amount of Spanish that didn’t post his/her name (I know it’s you Nick). I don’t know what part of “Google” you didn’t understand, “macht nichts” Thank you for the English/Spanish brief. “tus feo” just kidding, you are probably a good teacher that’s smoking to much weed and feel the need to give unsolicited advice occasionally, and I forgive for that…


  19. Mr. B says:

    As the saying goes Nick, it’s best to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are stupid, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    Sayeth the commenter who advises us to “google the Internet”. Perhaps you had best take your own advice, Estefania.

    (By the way, the noun form is “immigrant,” not “immigrate,” and saying “COMPRENDER” to a Spanish speaker is the equivalent of saying “To comprehend?” in English. Call me crazy, but as a teacher of English with a fair background in Spanish, I wouldn’t take literacy advice from you for anything.)


  20. Estefania Burgdorf says:

    Nick, bless you! The only thing I will acknowledge is that you are obviously in need of some professional counseling, but I don’t think you can afford my fee…For your info, to become a “LEGAL” immigrate in the USA, you must become a naturalized citizen, and one of the requirements is Quote: ‘You must be able to SPEAK, WRITE, READ basic ENGLISH’ Unquote: As the saying goes Nick, it’s best to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are stupid, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt. No more freebies Nick…


  21. Nick Kelsier says:

    The problem with your argument, Estefania, is your stupid assumption that legal immigrants to this country speak english.

    Would you like to acknowledge that mistake on your part or would you like to continue your idiotic nationalistic fascist-esque rant?


  22. Estefania Burgdorf says:

    I get it! The underlining message depicted by the song “English Only” has nothing to do with racism, any one that thinks this is a simple minded ignoramus that should join the out of touch X-President Jimmy Carter on the NUT farm in Plains, Ga…It’s estimated that there are 12 – 23 million illegal immigrants in this country and the majority don’t speak ENGLISH and have no desire to learn the language. These people have no regard for our laws and are costing the tax payers billions of $$$$. Cost figures compare to the War in Iraq (google the Internet) So why would any level headed person think that we should make special concessions to accommodate a bunch of “Illegals” that will eventually be the demise of this great country. The song should have included press “G” GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM “COMPRENDER”…Want to be part of the American Dream? Do it the right way and quit causing the American nightmare. Ron & Kay’s new song (Obama Care) is another foot stumping hit and sure to be piped into all the offices at the White House…Hats off to these great Patriots….As far as the FLAG goes it’s obvious that there was no disrespect intended, just something for a couple of bed wetters to to complain about…


  23. Nick Kelsier says:

    The problem, Glenn, is that song displays a racist tinged nationalistic rant against anyone who dares speak a language other than English. It also puts forth the nonsense proposal that English needs to be protected.

    Those two you claim to know may be just this side of Jesus Christ but the fact still remains is that particular view of theirs is wrong.


  24. Ed Darrell says:

    Glenn Gibble said:

    I know Ron & Kay casually and I can tell you they are great Americans and the song has a message that you may not like or understand, tuff sh#t…

    I know lots of great Americans who have offensive and erroneous views. One of the great things about America is that our Constitution gives people the right to believe any foolishness they please. They can’t require anyone else to follow it, but they can be as big a fool as they wish. It’s their right.

    I understand the message. It’s an offensive message, contrary to the well-being of our commercial enterprises, contrary to our traditional melting-pot ways (not so much as I’d wish, but then racism has always been a problem here).

    I disagree with the message, and I think Ron and Kay should take it down. Better to keep your YouTube account quiet and be thought a fool than to write a song about it and destroy all doubt, you know?

    You pea brain moron, take another look at the flag and the angle it was photographed from you will see it is displayed correctly and even it wasn’t in-accordance-with the Flag CODE, they didn’t have anything to do with…

    My only point was that the video is as sloppy with proper flag display as with other issues, like economic contributions of other-than-English-speaking Americans and residents, etc.

    So Ron and Kay, nice people that they may be in casual acquaintance, shouldn’t pose as uber patriots. They can mess up, too.

    Can you tell me where that flag display is? The U.S. flag would have to be many yards away to give a perspective issue there that shows it lower.

    But I suspect little regard was given for proper flag display in the making of the video, in any case. You’ve not convinced me otherwise. But let’s look at the geographic layout, por favor. If I’m wrong, show me the facts. Res ipsa loquitur, you know?

    And BTW flags are displayed on cakes, decals, pins, hats, etc…Maybe I should run out and scrap the flag decal off my car window…Duh! Get a fu%king life…

    Only if you care to display the flag properly. Somehow, I don’t think showing patriotism as prescribed by law is your goal.

    How would you feel were there to be a video of Osama bin Laden eating a cake decorated with a U.S. flag? Maybe you’re right, maybe we pay too much respect to it. In the 1970s there were jeans that had the British Union Jack on the seat. A kid sewed a U.S. flag on the seat of his Levis, and got arrested for it. But maybe you’re right, maybe we’re too uptight about respect for the flag.

    Of course, I’m not the one uptight about not knowing a little Spanish, and I’m not the one strumming my anti-U.S. tradition views on YouTube.

    And I’m not the one making a profane rant here.


  25. Glenn S Gibble says:

    I know Ron & Kay casually and I can tell you they are great Americans and the song has a message that you may not like or understand, tuff sh#t…You pea brain moron, take another look at the flag and the angle it was photographed from you will see it is displayed correctly and even it wasn’t in-accordance-with the Flag CODE, they didn’t have anything to do with…And BTW flags are displayed on cakes, decals, pins, hats, etc…Maybe I should run out and scrap the flag decal off my car window…Duh! Get a fu%king life…


  26. Nick Kelsier says:

    Not to mention the fact, Stanton, that it’s absolutely idiotic to expect new immigrants to this country who aren’t necessairly from english speaking countries to know english right off the bat. Exactly how do you expect new immigrants to assimilate into this country if they can’t speak the language and if they can’t communicate because nothing is in their language?


  27. Nick Kelsier says:

    The problem, Stanton, isn’t that it’s patriotic. It’s that it’s nationalistic jingoism. And pulling this “English only” crap only handicaps us and handicaps our businesses.

    English is the language of shakespeare. It’s the language of business. It doesn’t need protecting.


  28. Ed Darrell says:

    Stanton Lore: Why don’t you tell the Rivolis to “let it go?” Why is my view, which includes endorsement of free enterprise, full employment, a right to work, and richer American culture, take a back seat to bigotry?

    Hatemonger? Hey, I’m not the one insulting immigrants, businessmen, and America’s heritage.

    Odd how the bigots think they aren’t.


  29. Stanton Lore says:

    If you don’t like it, then don’t listen to it. It does have meaning, perhaps just a patriotic sentiment?, for many people. The fact that people like it is enough. Just email the people who sent it to you and say no thank you, or I don’t get it or something. But, like many hatemongers, you likely will keep blowing this all out of perspective. Something by the way which you could use. Nitpicking your way through the details of the song is as wasteful as people still upset that Bush beat Kerry in 2004. let it go! I like simple and I like patriotic. Let me enjoy it without your intellectualizing a non-intellectual experience. Get a life for crying out loud.


  30. Ed Darrell says:

    Mr. Bennett, you’re up way too late.

    I like the Rivolis style, but the message of this song and video is in error. The message should be trashed, I think.

    One of the issues they miss, I think, is the entire problem of a push-button menu on a call to any business. My experience is that no machine can be as fast nor accurate as a live receptionist who knows the organization. They blame the irritation on immigrants, when the real culprit is stupid corporations using misdirected automation.

    I’ll get off the soap box now.


  31. Marshall Bennett says:

    Ron and Kay Rivoli are nothing but garbage. Videos that advocate ignorance of other languages and cultures is one of the reasons why countries around the world have much disdain for us…


  32. Ed Darrell says:

    What is your excuse for being a loon and a burro, Ron Parker?


  33. Ron Parker says:

    onlycrook is an ass and who call himself such a stupid name, perhaps that is why he is such a loon. He like has never had someone i his family and anyone that died or is MIA while defending his silly ass. Go some where overcrook and start your own country.


  34. Juan says:

    Attention all racist xenophobics out there who love the “Press one for English” attack
    The worst thing you can say to a person is “You are wrong”… that is if you want to keep the person’s friendships. Since you are not my friend and I don’t even know who you are… and all I know about you is that you show xenophobic feelings towards immigrants, I will be blunt: You are wrong. You are stupid and the worst of it all, you may not even know it.
    It is because of people like you that hate and discrimination prevails in the face of the so called democratic and great country called the USA. “English Only” has been a flag carried by those who need an excuse to openly harass the immigrants with their righteous stand of “this here we do it this way”… go ahead and join the ranks of the Arpaios of Arizona… join the Mexicans hunting open season the red necks enjoy in their farms, supported by official state and federal budgets which by the way, don’t say no to the “Illegals” tax contributions. Go ahead and grab an AK47 and storm into China town and blast them all yelling “English only mother f___ers”!! That’d make your day wouldn’t it?…. do you, quietly and deep down in your pathologic psyche justify Hitler?… hey, they were only Jews…. Right?
    There is history data that validates the immigrant’s rights more than the European (Neo-American) settlers would like to admit. That is, from a moral and human rights perspective. An area unknown to you. Many of the “Mexicans” you harass now were in the USA before the USA: California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.
    Now…. What is the problem with language diversity? English was brought down to America (the continent) by the Englishmen and Spanish, the now most widely spoken language on Earth, was brought down by the Spaniards. Both languages went out and spread all over the globe. Nobody –as far as I know- has restricted (successfully) a culture from spreading and blending with others. There is not one single country that has attempted to have you check-in and leave your language at the door…. Well.. maybe now the USA?
    Have you been in some of those “Gringo communities” in Mexico? Have you? Do you believe they speak Spanish?…nah.. do you think they make an effort?… nope. I know lots of them who have been in Mexico for more than 5 years and their Spanish vocabulary is restricted to: Margarita, cerveza, senorita, gracias, andale, comprende and four tacos por favor. They have their enclave designed and built as they want. Eat enormous amounts of burgers and drink lots of beers on the 4th of July and have corn chips, salsa, guacamole and lots of tequila on 5 de Mayo…. Don’t even know why but they celebrate 5 de Mayo…. And get this: They speak English only!!!! In Mexico!!! Oh my god!! But who gives a f___ what language they speak…. Who cares? You care because you are stupid. I don’t tell you that to offend you. I mean it from the bottom of my heart. You are ignorant, racist, insensitive, socially retarded. You need to do something about it but if you don’t want to, so be it. Keep on dancing to the silly “English only” song and enjoy it. See? In the end you end up with a good free advice: Grow up; blend and enjoy. If you can’t, then let it be. Don’t broadcast your stupidity. Keep it to yourself. Comprende?
    Please don’t be bashful and come back for more, should you feel like this “Diversity 101” course was not enough. Next time I will prepare something more didactic and “insightful” for you…. And by the way….. No, I am not “here, illegally”…. And I speak, read and write Spanish and English …. And I choose what language to use with sensitivity and consideration for others. I am free to exercise my freedom. Neither you nor any of your clan will shut me up. F–k you… very much!


  35. Lois Kaness says:

    I find it interesting that several of the folks who love this song seem to have difficulty expressing that thought in English. Their entries on this site contain more misspellings, incomplete sentences, etc. than the entries of those opposed to the song’s sentiments. Guess their grammer school also failed to teach them that the word English should be capitalized. Brian, I was taught that swear words are used by those who don’t have the vocabulary to express themselves.


  36. Lois Kaness says:

    High school alum forwared this disturbing video. We cannot remain a mono-lingual nation if we are to succeed in the world market. Rather than crying out for English Only, we should be teaching our kids to speak Spanish, Arabic, Chinese dialects, etc. Our son lives and works in Abu Dhabi and tells us that, although English is the language used in business, his efforts to learn Arabic are appreciated within the community. Wait people are more anxious to please, landlords smile—and business prospects help you as you struggle to communicate in their language. Our son is only doing what success in the world market requires: Respecting the language and culture of his host country.


  37. Nick Kelsier says:

    And yet oh is under the conservative Republican president that the abortion rate goes up. And it is under the liberal President before him that the abortion rate went down. Because the liberal President…Clinton funded family planning services. And what was one of the first things Bush does when he gets into office? Cuts funding to those same services. So why is it that the pro-life crowd claims that they’re against abortion when they’re the ones doing things that up the abortion rate?

    And as for the “English Only” bullsh– it’s just that..bullsh–. You want to economically cripple the United States just so you can engage in a bunch of nationalistic jingoism. As if the language of Shakespeare is really in any danger. Oh please.

    Tell me, Aaron, when you were over in Nam did you automatically know how to speak Vietnamese the second you stepped foot in the country? I’m suspecting the answer to that question is no.

    So pray tell why are you being stupid enough to think that an immigrant here should just speak English from the start? Should they have to learn English? Yeah. But it takes time to learn English you twit and pulling this “English only” bullshit is only going to cripple them and keep them from adapting because they won’t be able to do anything here. You know…such as be able to register for English classes or knowing how to fill out the tax form.

    So all you and the Rivoli’s are doing is engaging in nationalist jingoistic bullshit just so you can pat yourselves on the back for living in this country and never having to do a damn thing to have to earn your ability to live in this country.

    So yes, Aaron, you and the Rivoli’s are indeed disgracing this country and neither of you speak for the “silent majority.”

    And I find it ironic that you’re railing against “political correctness” when it’s you and the Rivoli’s engaging in political correctness.


  38. Ed Darrell says:

    Flag-waving, patriotic, capitalist, economically free, welcoming crap.


  39. John Springfield says:

    You are full of crap.


  40. bill says:

    it all comes down to the almighty buck , right


  41. Ed Darrell says:

    If you don’t want English, when the bank asks, tell them what you want.

    If good customer support bothers you, pick a non-capitalist country and go live there. We capitalists like to let free markets run when they run to the good.

    Knowing a second language is an economic advantage. Offering customer service in more than one language expands one’s markets.

    Having immigrants who don’t know the language is a hallmark of a free nation. If you’re embarrassed about your service in Vietnam, keep it to yourself. Otherwise, having a company offer two languages of customer service is what you fought to make safe.

    You really shouldn’t go about with your irony meter turned off all the time.


  42. Aaron Lambert says:


    GREAT SONG. I am glad some one has the talent and the guts to say what we the people are thinking.

    The silent majority has been silent to long. If you don’t like America enough to learn our English lanuage then get the “HELL” out. We the people need to stand up and tell all you dumb asses that have let all the politically correct crap happen to SHUT UP. It greatly pisses me off when the bank and phone systems ask if I want English. I am in America there is no other acceptable language…Period.

    I fought and served in Nam in the 60s. I support this great FREE country and the right of others to want to LEGALLY become an American. But they need to speak English when in public. They have the right to speak what ever they want in private.

    Support Americans…Buy American when you can find it . Made in America!


  43. […] Not what the “English only” crowd wants to hear. […]


  44. Ed Darrell says:

    If the Rivolis don’t want to do business in the U.S., they can do business elsewhere. Spanish speakers are a huge market in the U.S., and have been for the past 50 or 60 years at least.

    The Rivolis have every right to be as ignorant of language and culture as they choose. They have no right to insist anyone else act stupid, too.


  45. Ed Kaser says:

    Why have the Rivolis have to apolize to anyone? You are nitpicking in a big way. I have no problem with visitors from other lands not speaking english but like she said in the song if you are going to live here at least some english or stay to yourself


  46. Ed Darrell says:

    No one says you have to learn another language. But I cannot understand why anyone would wish to economically cripple the United States.

    Speaking more languages correlates with rising income, increasing jobs, better housing, greater exports, and a positive Balance of Payments.

    Speak English all you want. Why should the rest of us have to pay for your lack of desire to learn another language? It’s unfair.


  47. Kris Eckelberg says:

    I sevred in the service for 10 years, and feel this song hits the nail on the head, people want to be here ,shouild be able to speak english. Why should US citizens have to learn to speak other languages. For the people that want to speak other languages that is their privalge. But i’m tired of hearing other languages in the work place ,that you can’t other stand. I feel if you live in the US learn to speak the language. At work Speak ENGLISH !!!!! I do not see no wrong in this song. This is why our country is in the shape its in right now. we are like foriegnors in our home land.


  48. Brian Kaiser says:

    F— all you all who think that she is disparaging the flag. B— me. F— the illegal immigrants too, they are as bad or worse than all the liberal douche bags who want to make this song out to be wrong. Billions of dollars is what they are taking away from the legal, yes LEGAL Americans, each and every year. Anybody that is willing to come sponge off the United States should be required to at least attempt to learn ENGLISH! HOORAY for Kay and her husband. True Patriots, both of them! Brian Kaiser if you don’t agree, oh well, that is what AMERICA is based upon. You have a right to disagree. Isn’t it great. B— me anyways you liberal a–munch!!!!!


  49. Bo Hitchcock says:

    She may think that double negatives are cool and country, but it just shows she “don’t know nothing” about English.


  50. Ed Darrell says:

    Many excellent knowledgeable scientists of good reputation agree with the latest WHO studies showing you are and have been terrible wrong for decades about the problems and use of DDT. I agree with them. You, instead, want to sacrifice the lives of tens of millions of young black Africans because Eddy agrees with an uninformed whacko named Rachel.

    Balderdash. There is no WHO scientist who says use of DDT in the U.S. would save anyone in Africa. The Bush administration refusal to fund use of DDT against malaria is opposed by almost every environmental organization you can name.

    Carson was right. Her science reporting was backed by good studies, and later studies have confirmed everything but her fear that DDT would turn out to be a potent human carcinogen (it’s only a suspected human carcinogen).

    Newspapers sell for under $1.00 every day. They are good investments.


  51. Ed Darrell says:

    You state you like the Fed Figures better. However, Robert Rector dealt with those figures and all the others too and found that in the long run, 30 to 40 years out, 12 million illegal aliens will cost us a minimum of $2.6 trillion dollars. I won’t live to see that occur. Hopefully you or your children will get to pay for it if it happens.

    I think Rector’s numbers discount the contributions immigrants make, and the taxes they pay. I think he discounts them about 150%. Once we take into account the contributions, as the Fed does, we find immigration is a net gain.

    And that stands to reason, since immigrants are fueling our job growth, for both immigrant and non-immigrant populations. What is it you have against job growth?


  52. Ed Darrell says:

    But most important, you are a truly wasted American space. America needs people that love and respect our country and our culture as opposed demeaning and attacking it. America needs people that will support enforcement of our laws.

    You’re starting a petition to jail those who disrespect our flag on YouTube, then, I take it — after all, we can’t have people demeaning our flag while pretending to wave it. Or demeaning the flag while waiving it.

    Either way, it’s the hypocritical patriot, the sunshine patriot I’m aiming at. You can defend hypocrisy all you want; I prefer real people, and real issues.


  53. Ed Darrell says:

    Ed, how stupid can you be. First of all money is fungible. Saying that the money is paying for defense spending as opposed to Medicare, Medicaid or any of the other Federal Government expenditures is ridiculous.

    Fungibility is extraneous. My point is this: Defense costs do not decrease when immigrants leave. The Defense Department doesn’t charge on a per capita basis. So saying that these costs are unique to immigrants is hooey. It’s not a cost of the immigrants being here.

    Same thing with much of the other stuff counted in, NASA (we have yet to send an illegal immigrant into space, and I’ll wager that had we not sent immigrants up, somebody else would have taken their place and the cost would have been the same), the National Forests, the National Parks, etc., etc. In fact, the cost to you goes down, because the costs are spread among more payers. I don’t know why the NAS included those costs. They do not apply.


  54. Jere Bashinski says:

    Darn it Ed, I asked you to just not to tell me if you vote. You have spoiled not only my whole day but also my whole week. You really know how to hurt a guy. Besides, in addition to being an old Pollock, I am fat, ugly, and uneducated, especially compared to you. You are picking on a real victim- type and that should go against everything you claim to stand for. Naughty naughty!

    Besides you don’t really deal with any of the data I supplied. You merely discount it and label those that supply it as racists or bigots or worse yet, Conservatives. Tell me Ed. Were you guilty of being a racist in your younger years? Do you have a guilt complex? Are you trying to make up for something you did and to force everyone else to follow you in the process by labeling them racists too because you have a guilt complex? I wonder.

    Let me point out some of the silliest statements in your recent response. I expect better.

    1. The NAS also notes:

    In fact, except for immigrant households from Latin America, today’s current immigrants are net fiscal contributors to the overall fiscal position of native U.S. households, primarily because of their large positive net contributions to the federal treasury to help pay for defense spending.

    Ed, how stupid can you be. First of all money is fungible. Saying that the money is paying for defense spending as opposed to Medicare, Medicaid or any of the other Federal Government expenditures is ridiculous.

    However even more important is the statement “EXCEPT FOR HOUSEHOLDS FROM LATIN AMERICA”. As I pointed out in my previous post, the result of that statement was that the overall situation related to the total comparison of positive input to our treasury as opposed to outgoes from legal immigrants was $34 billion dollars on the negative side of the equation. ALL of that $34 billion was related to Latin Americans. All of the other groups included in the study showed a positive input. The Latin Americans offset the positive input from all the other groups and made the total outcome a negative $34 billion. What is it you don’t get about negative $34 billion from Latin American immigrants?

    2. The charts show the NAS ASSUMED (emphasis is mine) a net drain from each immigrant household of $2809 annually for national defense. Really! And your assumption they assumed as opposed to justified those costs is based upon what proof? And once again, money is fungible. How can we assign anything in the Federal budget goes to any particular Federal expenditure? How am I to know that your assumption that NAS made an assumption is accurate? It is my assumption that the NAS finding is legitimate and was based upon valid data. Prove it wrong. Don’t assume.

    3. You state you like the Fed Figures better. However, Robert Rector dealt with those figures and all the others too and found that in the long run, 30 to 40 years out, 12 million illegal aliens will cost us a minimum of $2.6 trillion dollars. I won’t live to see that occur. Hopefully you or your children will get to pay for it if it happens.

    4. You state that the study I referred to assumes, there is that assumption word again, that all Hispanics have low education, which is not so. That is more Edwin Baloney. The facts were based on two separate studies. One of those studies was done by the PEW Hispanic Center. I assume you are in love with the PEW Hispanic Center. I assume they are definitely EddyPOO kind of folks. The 65% figure for illegal immigrants that I gave you in my previous post was based on the results of their study. Why do you claim their results are “assumptions”? Once again, prove it. The other study was done by the Center for Immigration Studies. They came up with much higher figures than PEW. I assume they aren’t EddyPOO people but even so calling their findings assumptions would be silly. Prove it.

    These are just a few of the silly statements in your last post. However, dealing with all of them would be a waste of time.

    You find racism here and racism there and racism everywhere. And you find Socialism here and Socialism there and Socialism everywhere. So please, once again, define Socialism. After you define it, explain how our present immigration policy fits the definition. And by the way, it is illogical to ask me to prove a negative (i.e. why the national immigration policy is not Socialism). With all of your education, I would think that you would know that. From a logical point of view it is your responsibility to prove that our immigration policy is Socialism. Even an uneducated Pollock can figure that out.

    I don’t think that establishing national immigration laws that work to the economic and cultural benefit of our country and then enforcing them is the least bit Socialist. In fact, I am sure that Karl Marx would be an open borders person just like you appear to be. After you define Socialism, you can explain why our immigration laws are Socialist. Remember that I am a stupid uneducated Pollock so please supply lots of examples of how the results of our “Socialistic” immigration laws fit into your definition of Socialism.

    And how is allowing legal immigration of huge numbers of Asians, Hispanics, and Blacks as compared to Whites for the past 47 years racist? Do you have data to show the information is inaccurate? Do you believe Mr. Brimelow lied about the percentages of whites vs. minorities in America in 1990? Do you believe the same thing isn’t still occurring today? If so, please supply the sources of data I can consult to support your beliefs. And please don’t give me more data from the 1800s or early 1900s. It isn’t relevant or analogous. If our present policies are racist, why are Caucasian Immigrants only 25% of the legal immigrants that have been coming to America for nearly 50 years? If it is racist, it can only be whites that are the victims of the racism.

    Tell me why, if people decided to illegally break into your home instead of into your nation because they are poorer than you are and wish to share those things which I assume you worked to obtain, would you find it Socialism to throw them out? I mean even if they agreed to clean your house and take care of your yard at a cut rate, would you agree they had a right to stay in your home?

    Would you find it racist to throw them out if they were Hispanic, or Indian, or Asian, or Black as opposed to white? Perhaps you can explain the difference between throwing them out of the house that you own as opposed to throwing them out of the Nation that we own. And why would throwing them out of our Nation be Socialism if throwing them out of your house, even thought they agreed to clean it and to care for your yard at cut rates, is merely protecting your right to own property? If throwing poor people of color out of your house when they break in and offer to do work for the space they occupy isn’t racist or socialist, why is throwing them out of our Nation racist or socialist?

    Now I did find something very racist items in your background on your website. Even though some very definitive scientific studies have proved that DDT is not a problem to wildlife or the environment and that tens of millions of black Africans have and will die if it isn’t employed to control mosquitoes, you deny the proof. And, in that process you sentence tens of millions of additional black people to death. Can I assume that your silly and wrong headed view of damage to the environment are more important than the lives of those tens of millions of black people that will be forced to die for your ridiculous beliefs?

    Many excellent knowledgeable scientists of good reputation agree with the latest WHO studies showing you are and have been terrible wrong for decades about the problems and use of DDT. I agree with them. You, instead, want to sacrifice the lives of tens of millions of young black Africans because Eddy agrees with an uninformed whacko named Rachel.

    Using your standards in other circumstances, what you are doing is RACIST RACIST RACIST! It is innocent black people and not white people that will die as a result of your uninformed silliness. Now Ed, that is real racism. It isn’t the phony baloney racism of which you are so wont to accuse anyone that disagrees with you.

    And you didn’t respond to my idea concerning restricting abortion. By the way, that idea isn’t racist either. The abortion rate killing innocent Black and Hispanic human beings by women that have those abortions for trivial reasons is much higher among Blacks and Hispanics than it is for Caucasians. Is that the Liberal “Progressive” plan? You liberals are supporting the killing of more Black and Hispanic babies as a percentage of their populations than is the case for Whites. Again, using your standards, Abortion is RACIST RACIST RACIST! What do you say about that Ed?

    So Ed, even though I freely admit I am a stupid, old, fat, ugly, uneducated Pollock, I would much rather be me than you. You are the Racist and the Socialist. Worse, you don’t even know it and so you can’t possible understand it. It is probably the result of your legal training. Shakespeare was right about attorneys just as he was about a number of other things.

    You support policies that kill essentially people of color. You support open borders and non-enforcement of our immigration laws. You are not a capitalist.

    You are a Socialist disguised as a Liberal “Progressive”. Opening our borders to anyone that wants to come, not enforcing our immigration law, having cities and States literally over turn the enforcement of our immigration laws, and making America a world welfare sink for all the poor and uneducated people of the world, especially if they are people of color, has nothing to do with Capitalism and everything to do with Socialism. It is nutty Liberal “progressivism at the extreme. It is completely crazy from both economic and cultural points of view. It is no different than destroying America by having us commit National suicide.

    But most important, you are a truly wasted American space. America needs people that love and respect our country and our culture as opposed demeaning and attacking it. America needs people that will support enforcement of our laws. America needs to return to our Constitution and to our founding concepts. Those are the things that made us the greatest country the world has ever known. They revolve around individual rights and freedoms and have nothing to do with group or tribal rights that so inform your positions.

    Don’t dial one for Spanish. Instead make English the language of America again just as it has been for more than two hundred years. Make us one group and one culture with one language to sustain us. And control immigration to insure America is obtaining only those people that are the best that other countries have to offer and that those immigrants truly want to become part of the American culture and aren’t coming just to get a share of America’s bounty. We only want those legal immigrants that will become one with the American culture that is already here.


  55. Ed Darrell says:

    The study you referred to assumes that all hispanics have low education, which is not so; the study assumes incorrectly that illegal aliens all have the lowest paying jobs, which is not so. The study assumes that illegal aliens are all paid cash, that they live in no home inside the U.S., that they spend not a single dollar for food or rent, or transportation or entertainment. For one example, you say “the public at large” pays all the costs for immigrant children. First, that’s false: Many immigrants, including illegals, have health insurance; almost all of them pay taxes. They cannot avoid sales taxes, gasoline taxes, or the property taxes that pay for schools and hospitals. The Fed studies account for those payments; most other studies ignore them.

    In short, the study is hooey. It’s from the Heritage Foundation, which has never been happy about increasing the economy if such increases benefit anyone who is not a millionaire — the bias might be understandable.

    The curious thing is why you advocate a socialist solution for what should be a free-market problem — and of course, you don’t bother to even try to answer the question.

    U.S. immigration policies are inherently racist, and have been ever since they were instituted. They are not based on need for workers, nor economic flows, nor need of immigrants to find freedom. In 1872 the policies were anti-Chinese, and those policies persisted into the 1970s. (In 1872 it was simply “no Chinese allowed in;” the argument was that Chinese on the U.S. west coast were taking jobs from whites. Subsequent studies show the Chinese were creating businesses and creating the jobs they took plus some; a recession ensued.) In the 1880s the policies were anti-eastern Europe and anti-Mediterranean — “no swarthies.” Those policies continued well into the middle of the 20th century. After 1900 U.S. immigration policies have been biased against Africa and the Asian Subcontinent.

    Today our policies are directed at stopping immigration from South and Central America — why? No good reason. Immigrants lead the U.S. economy in job creation, and new job growth follows immigration both legal and illegal. Much of the boom we’ve had since 1991 is because we’ve been able to bring in workers from south of Brownsville to fill the jobs, spend their money, and do the work.

    The Heritage Foundation study gives no credit for what any immigrant spends, which is why I prefer the Federal Reserve Board’s more serious and sober, and much more accurate study. Those studies determined that we can say any immigrant with a high school equivalency is a significant benefit to the economy, paying more in taxes to governments than they take out in services. They also show that immigrants with less-than-high-school education generally are a net benefit in government payments. The study also notes that claims of illegal immigrants using government services, other than some hospital use, are hooey — because in order to get government payments, the person must enroll in the programs, which includes giving valid addresses and other information that Homeland Security checks to find people to deport. Similarly, illegal immigrants generally overpay income taxes, because they fear that filing for a refund will reveal them to Homeland Security.

    The NAS study is most distressing. Let me quote:

    Combining the local, state, and federal estimates of the net fiscal burdens imposed by immigrant households on native residents in New Jersey and California shows that the average native household bears an overall fiscal burden of $229 in New Jersey and $1,174 in California.

    Why is that distressing? I don’t expect the NAS to generally be so biased in assumptions. The charts in that chapter show that NAS assumed a net drain from each immigrant household of $2,809 annually for national defense. Without that thrown in, every immigrant household in the nation comes in with a net gain to each state. This squirrels the entire study. If we could remove every immigrant household today, both legal and illegal, the defense costs would not drop. Allocating national defense costs in this fashion probably invalidates the study; if the “other costs” include things like National Forest Service, National Park Service, the U.S. Department of Education, NASA, and other costs that are wholly independent of immigration, then the study is seriously out of whack, biased to show much greater costs than actual. None of those costs drops an iota if immigrants leave the nation. Immigrants don’t overuse national defense, or the space program, or federal education programs (since the federal contribution to public, non-secondary education is minuscule, and illegal immigrants don’t use the secondary education money).

    So the NAS study skews costs by about $5,000 per immigrant household, and then comes out saying those households are between $200 to $1,000 in the red on the contribution/withdrawal scale. If we unskew the cost figures, each immigrant household contributes between $4,000 and $4,800, to government, beyond benefits they use.

    And those figures completely ignore real contributions to the economy in goods and services consumed.

    I’ll stick with the Fed’s figures, thank you — I find them much more accurate.

    The NAS also notes:

    In fact, except for immigrant households from Latin America, today’s current immigrants are net fiscal contributors to the overall fiscal position of native U.S. households, primarily because of their large positive net contributions to the federal treasury to help pay for defense spending.

    Did you catch that? “Large positive net contributions to the federal treasury to help pay for defense spending.” Those costs are much higher, ten years later. And in no case would they drop a penny if we could move all immigrants. Considering the disproportionate burden of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan assumed by immigrants illegal and legal, it appears to me that we could not afford in any to slow down immigration.

    There is also this: Most of the costs the NAS study assumes are costs for legal immigrants. Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and other such expenses, which are a significant portion of the total, are programs that illegal immigrants are denied from using by law, and generally would not sign up for if such bars were lifted.

    So, if you’re saying that all immigrants are bad, I have to say we know better than that. If you’re trying to make a case that illegal immigrants are a drain on the economy, with ten-year old figures I’d be inclined to say the later Fed figures trump them, but considering the huge holes in assumptions NAS makes the Fed figures look even better.

    From my work with Peter Brimelow (though it was a couple of decades ago), I wouldn’t trust any statistic he gives on immigration. He’s quite Eurocentric and caucasian in his biases; but generally, he’s a polemicist. If he takes a position, he rarely considers any information opposing that position, especially the rich economic data that oppose his conclusions. And no, he can’t answer why he’s opposed to the heavy hand of socialism in all other parts of government, even where it doesn’t exist, but he favors it when it comes time to exclude immigrants, either. As you might gather, I don’t consider your being on Brimelow’s side a persuasive argument in the least. (And, frankly, the V-Dare site you refer to does strike me as tinged with racism.)

    Don’t vote? You’re really living in a fantasy world. I organize for every election. Our precinct has been key in turning Dallas County around; I can’t afford to have stupid local policies cost me thousands of dollars. I need a strong, vital economy, and particularly here in Texas, that involves a lot of immigration.

    So, you want to limit freedom of opportunity in America, slow job growth, and take away a huge offset for federal expenses — and what benefit are we supposed to get? And tell me, why isn’t that limitation you propose, socialism?


  56. Jere Bashinski says:

    Ed, you are just too smart and educated for an old racist sexist bigot like me. Of course I have an excuse. I am a Pollock. Doesn’t that get me into one of you Liberal Lefty victim groups? You know Pollocks are really really dumb.

    By the way, I know you have a computer so I assume you know how to use Google. If so, you would do well to check your assumptions before making completely dumb statements. You know about assumptions. Bad assumptions make an ass out of you and me.

    Did you read the article on the URL I supplied to you? If you did, you would know that the estimates concerning the number of adult illegal immigrants without high school educations run between 49% and 61%. When you add to that the fact that 16% of illegal immigrants are children, it means that between 65% and 76% of all illegal immigrants Do Not have high school educations. The lowest estimate of illegal immigrants without a high school education is 65%. To a Pollock, that is lot. What does a dreamer say?

    And, children no matter what their race have no income so they add nothing to the economic pie. They only take out. The public at large pays all those costs especially at the local State, County, and City levels. That isn’t racism or socialism. It is a fact.

    And speaking of children, a thought comes to mind. You want to haul tons of uneducated low skilled non-English speaking immigrants into the US because we just got have workers. I have another idea. How about outlawing the abortion of human beings for trivial reasons. I mean, we have killed 30 or 40 million innocent children in the past 30 to 40 years. Most of those dead humans would have grown up to complete high school and nearly all of them would speak English. Could we use that to deal with your need for workers? It would add as many people a immigration and we wouldn’t have to turn the earth upside down to get them to assimilate.

    Now lets think for a minute about the “racism” rampant in our present “socialist” legal immigration policy. Now Ed, you need to try and follow along. I know you can do it. Remember what your teachers told you when you were still in school. You just have to try hard. If necessary, I can promise to give you an apple if you finally get it.

    Here is the URL for the wikipedia page dealing with immigration.,_Demographic,_and_Fiscal_Effects_of_Immigration

    I don’t usually use wikipedia for this kind of thing but since I am dealing with you I decided I would supply something that even you might be able to understand. In addition, the information with the most important impact in this article concerning your statements about racism and immigration in the US is from a National Academy of Science. I assume even you would give them some credibility. Here are the figures:

    In the period 1997 to 2005

    17% of legal immigrants came from Europe or Canada
    33% of legal immigrants came from Asia
    43% of legal immigrants came from Latin America

    In addition according to an article written in 1992 by Peter Brimelow at

    85% of the 11.8 million between 1971 and 1990 were from third world countries, 44% from Latin America and the Caribbean, 36% from Asia, and 20% were from one country – Mexico. In addition, in 1960 the US population was 88.6% white. In 1990 the white population was 75.6% white. That is a drop of 13% points in the white population from 1971 to 1990 and I will be you tens of thousands of dollars the percentage of whites in America now, some seventeen years later, is much lower again.

    How can even a dunce call that a racist immigration policy? You live in a dream world.

    The National Academy Study I referenced earlier also shows the fiscal impact of the immigrants both legal and illegal according to where they come from. That study shows that from 1997 to 2005, the European and Canadian legal and illegal immigrants added 3.2 billion in excess of what they took out. Asians added $5.3 billion. Other legal and illegal immigrants added $2.7 billion more than they took. Only one group, Latin Americans, took out more than they put in. They took out $44.6 billion dollars leaving the money received from all immigrants for that period of time $34 billion dollars in the hole. I think that means that the Spanish Speaking immigrants are a net loss to America’s economic situation. Does that make this a “racist” study? Are they lying? What does a dreamer like you say about that Ed?

    Ed, please make my day. Tell me you are so actively involved in your dream world that you don’t vote. And if you do vote, just neglect to answer the question so I can continue to hope.


  57. Ed Darrell says:

    If you don’t think your solution is socialism, please explain why. U.S. immigration is a very pure form of socialism, complete with planned outputs (new immigrants) that have little to do with anything other than racism (our first immigration law was simply “no Chinese;” since then we get quotas, with lower quotas for people of color — there is absolutely no connection to the needs of the nation, or the benefit of the nation and citizens; the working permits for high demand jobs waiver doesn’t work).

    Immigration is planned outputs.

    We have an economic crisis in this nation. We need workers, and new workers are especially in need. While many of the jobs filled by illegal immigrants are low-wage, many more are not. You assume, without evidence, that illegal immigrants don’t speak English, and that they don’t have a high school equivalent, and that they don’t earn significant wages. Were any of those assumptions accurate, you’d be on the way to making immigration socialism with an economic basis. But as Orrhenius noted, there is not a lot of evidence to support any of your assumptions.

    It’s rather tragic that people today can’t distinguish socialism from a free market. It’s more tragic that anyone would laugh when the distinction is pointed out.

    I dont’ think the American airline industry really is an economic burden to you. Nor is the cellular phone industry an economic burden to you. And I doubt there would be any great benefit from additional taxes on Ford, GM and Chrysler to get them to slow down their sales in Spanish. I think you don’t understand what economics is or how it works. I think you have a very fuzzy and inaccurate view of American industry and the American people, and you could benefit from figuring out that multiple language capabilities makes a more robust and growing economy. Spanish-speakers are a significant portion of our citizenry, wholly apart from immigrants. That you wish to hobble great American industries only shows the short-sightedness of your position.

    How about a new tax law that makes you pay for the taxes not paid by the incomes not earned by any illegal immigrants deported? That would only partly cover costs — meat costs are already up 5% due to raids in three states to deport meat cutters (and while you may call $20/hour “low-wage,” that’s not the way most people look at it).

    How much are you really willing to pay for your bigotry against other languages and people of other colors? If you could impose a tax on me to pay for the government costs of illegal aliens, can we make a deal? Since right now illegal immigrants are a net benefit to government, can I collect in a negative tax? I’d be all for it; I’ll take the bill for all illegal immigrants in Texas alone. Texas’ figures show that the state makes more than $1 billion to the good from illegal immigrants. I could use $1 billion.


  58. Jere Bashinski says:


    In case you don’t get it, the argument is about ILLEGAL immigrants and their effect on America’s economy and its culture.

    Here is a piece of data for you to consider. In 2001:

    The top 5% of wage earners paid 53.25% of the total income taxes.
    The top 10% of wage earners paid 64.89% of the total income taxes.
    The top 50% of wage earners paid 96.03% of the total income taxes.

    Tell me Ed, where do you think Spanish Speaking uneducated low skilled and low paid illegal immigrants are likely to fall in the data I supplied above. And if we continue to find ways to encourage them to maintain there Spanish language and culture while here, how much longer will it take the to assimilate? I know you Liberals don’t care, but it is extremely expensive for the rest of us that do pay taxes.

    Then of course, if some of these low skilled and low paid workers actually did pay taxes, they will likely become beneficiaries of our earned income tax credit. I assume even you know what that means. It is Marxist thing, right here in good old capitalist America. It is a socialist wealth redistribution clause in our socialist graduated income tax system. And, I know you don’t like socialism.

    In addition to the fact that illegal immigrants won’t pay their share of income taxes, there are the costs of schooling their children, medical and hospital care, police and fire services etc. etc. etc. Low paid workers don’t pay their share of those costs either. To deal with all of these items, including the cost to the social security system and the costs of legalizing all these essentially Spanish Speaking Illegal Immigrants, try this article.

    By the way, I read the article by Orrenius. Nothing in it, disputes the information I am supplying to you nor does it dispute the logical implications of what I am saying. In fact, she glosses over most of it by not actually dealing with any specifics and in a number of cases what she say supports what I have written here. Once again Ed, you just can’t get it.

    As for the issue of assimilation, press one for Spanish helps assists in insuring greatly delayed assimilation even if it ever occurs to any reasonable degree. Low income low skilled illegal immigrants that aren’t required to learn English will live in ghettos just a low skilled low income black do. They won’t assimilate in any timely fashion if they assimilate at all. In fact, they are likely to be another Liberal victim group demanding special consideration just as they are now demanding the right to be legalized. I assume that even you have heard about the problems now presented by America’s low skilled low income Black population even thought they speak English.

    I must admit that your line about socialist BS posing as patriotism cracked me up. Only a mind that works like yours could come up with that one. It is truly great. Perhaps you could make money as comedian too.

    You indicate you are one of those that have found a way to make money from the push one for Spanish feature on many voice mail systems. If that is true, you are helping to place an economic burden on the rest of us as you do whatever you do by helping all those illegal Spanish Speaking immigrants just as those that give them jobs and supply them with housing do. Obviously we need to find a way to make you pay your fair share of those additional costs. Perhaps we could pass a new tax law that requires businesses using that feature to pay additional taxes to pay for the costs of the illegality they encourage. Is that capitalist enough for you ED?


  59. Ed Darrell says:

    I find it interesting that you claim “lower income workers don’t pay their way,” when ever study done indicates that immigrant workers pay their way. Even, perhaps especially, the illegal ones. They pay taxes — many single illegal alien workers pay more taxes than some of our largest corporations.

    So, if you want to sacrifice your income for a political view that is absolutely, 100% at odds with free enterprise, be my guest. But please don’t try to cut off my economic nose to spite your face. Not your right.

    Here, get a fact, c’mon back when you’ve run the numbers:

    And as for the Rivolis, if they don’t want to do business with a company that caters to English speakers (it is #1 on the menu, after all), let ’em take their money elsewhere. The rest of us have discovered that speaking Spanish is profitable. It’s free enterprise, and it makes money.

    Enough of the socialist b-s posing as patriotism. Do you really think caucasians originated in Iowa?


  60. Jere Bashinski says:

    It is difficult to remember when I have read so much arrogant, arcane, pedantic silliness about a topic in one place. It isn’t just nitpicking. It is completely beyond ridiculous.

    By the way, I have never read the “flag code” and I probably never will. What is even more important is that I, and anyone else with an ounce of common sense, will never need to read it to know when people are showing respect or disrespect for the flag of the world’s greatest nation. The Rivolis show nothing but the greatest respect for our flag, whether the video accompanying their song complies with an obscure and unknown flag code or not.

    I would tell Bernada that the luckiest thing that ever happened to the descendants of the American Indians is that they are now US citizens. I wonder if you can imagine what life would now be like for Indians in this country if they had continued living in their primitive warring tribal cultures. Bernada, it is time to get real, if you are actually capable of doing that.

    And, Ed it is almost impossible to know where to start to deal with your political correctness. I assume you still believe in Santa Claus and Man Caused Global Warming even if Global Warming actually really ends up occurring. And Ed, that ain’t a sure thing. I hope you don’t mind my use of the vernacular.

    To start I would point out that your grand concern about people that don’t follow the flag code while excusing million of people that don’t obey our immigration laws is extremely stupid. And, have you ever bothered to read Robert Rector’s analysis of the cost of legalizing 12 to million illegal immigrants and the tens of millions of “family” members that would be allowed to follow them? The amount, as I recall, is about 2.5 TRILLION dollars.

    The reason that is true, Ed, is that low income workers don’t pay their way. It is built into the Left Wing graduated income tax and the Marxist welfare systems that are redistributing wealth in America. And that analysis doesn’t even deal with any of the so called “assimilation” that is extremely unlikely to occur with today’s technology for people to stay in touch with their root especially in the “multi-cultural” world envisioned by America’s Liberals, or as they now prefer to call themselves, Progressives. As I said to Bernada, it is time for you to get real.

    America is lucky to have the Rivolis. If I were a religious man, I would say THANK GOD for the Rivolis! If you want to dial one, two, or three for some other language, I suggest that you move to a nation with tribal cultures. Think Iraq! Think China! Let the Spanish speakers learn to speak English. America doesn’t want or need a tribal society. Better yet, just think!


  61. Ed Darrell says:

    I was thinking it was Urdu — showing my own cultural ignorance here — was it Farsi? Thanks for the catch. I’ll have to track it down.


  62. pat says:

    Ed Darrell said, in part, at July 16th, 2007 at 10:36 am:

    The lack of Urdu speakers probably led directly to the capture of our embassy in Tehran in 1979. The lack of Arabic readers stopped our security services from learning of the planned attacks on the World Trade Center until after it had occurred.


    I am confused, but nothing new there. Urdu is not a common language in Iran. Are you thinking that terrorists from the Indian sub-continent were the perpetrators of the capture of the Embassy in 1979? According to the CIA fact book, the most common language in Iran is still Persian and its dialects (I usually refer to Farsi as the most common of the dialects.)

    However, I am also with you (I think it is you) about disrespecting the flag. It is all too common. Businesses often continue to fly flags that are tattered, one of my pet peeves. I have been known to anonymously leave copies of the flag code at banks, burger joints, and even post offices that didn’t seem to know the right way to display a flag. It is “a grand old flag” and that is more important to me than whether I have to press “1” for English.


  63. Ed Darrell says:

    My experience, Missy, is that those who are worried about people speaking Spanish here are the same ones who don’t want Native Americans around at all — their languages are similarly suppressed. The Rivoli’s unwarranted rant doesn’t specify Spanish — did it occur to you that she might be complaining about getting services in Navajo in Tuba City?

    The song is part of a campaign against speaking Spanish, and making allowances for people who don’t speak English. It’s a racist campaign, and it works against the stuff that keeps our economy growing.

    Plus they disrespect the flag, and so, as I’ve noted, I think they lose the right to claim to be U.S. flag-wavers.

    Yes, the Rivolis are in fact sayign people should hot have the right to speak the language they choose. Hence the repeated order to “speak English!”

    Read through my blog — you’ll see I’m aware and concerned about Native American rights and history.


  64. missy says:

    Hi Ed. Long time, no speak. I am looking at the video as it is, not putting preconceived ideas into it. Do you think the Rivoli’s are not tax-paying citizens?

    Fact- The voting booths, instructions, & materials are in English & Spanish here. Is this another example of our government suppressing other languages & customs? I think not.

    Nobody is saying that people do not have the right to speak the language they choose in their homes, places of worship, community, etc. But if you are coming to this country to enjoy its’ benefits & freedoms, you should know some of the language.

    Here, people can take a 2 weekend immersion course to learn the language of a country they plan on just VISITING.

    How come you are not concerned about the treatment of the ORIGINAL people of this land; the Native Americans?


  65. Ed Darrell says:

    What is it you think the video calls for, Missy?

    And why do these people get a pass on insulting the flag, when the same pass isn’t given to tax-paying, U.S. resident immigrants who march for the simple right to work and pay taxes?


  66. missy says:

    Ed, take a pill, you are so dramatic. Who is suppressing other languages & where is this so-called law? I hope you realize it is not against the law to speak or learn other languages in this country!!! Again, you are going directly from “A” to “G” Where do you get these ideas?

    Fact- As I stated before, I don’t know where you live, but where I live students MUST take a second language in grade school & college. Is that an example of suppressing other languages & customs?
    Fact- Also, where I live, my friend sent her adopted daughter to KOREAN CAMP so she could learn about her native culture. Is that an example of suppressing other languages & customs?
    Fact- I work with a gentleman who is a retired French teacher who took the Frence Club on a trip to FRANCE. Is that an example of suppressing other languages & customs?
    Fact- In the Home Depots here, there are signs in BOTH English & Spanish. Is that an example of suppressing other languages & customs?
    Fact- The predominant language spoken in this country is English. Why do you find this fact so threatening?

    Again, I don’t see any factual evidence to your emotional claim that “the speaking of Spanish in the U.S. today” is being suppressed. It certainly is not the case where I live.


  67. Ed Darrell says:

    How is bigotry against other languages — and the education and culture that go along with those languages — not bigotry against learning the languages as well? If the persona singing the lyric understood Spanish, what’s the problem?

    If English is the “#1 language” in the U.S., why do we need a law to suppress other languages? In every other instance I know, suppression of speaking languages is racist based. In our official actions around the world, we have discouraged government programs to suppress languages people choose to speak in their own towns. Often we’ve included the evidence of such suppression programs as evidence of genocide.

    What noble purpose is served by suppressing the speaking of Spanish in the U.S. today? What’s the difference between “English only” and “right-hand use only,” or “Irish only?” Spell out the differences, I’d like to hear them.


  68. missy says:

    I think students should be taught other languages in school. I’ve never, ever heard anyone who was against that. Ed, this song is not against teaching other languages in school, why do you infer that it is saying that? Unless I missed something in the lyrics, I do not recall them being against foreign language education. You are making quite an errouneous assumption here. I learned French in high school & Spanish in college & was glad I did.

    Fact- We speak English in this country as our first language & are taught other languages in school. Also, where I live people can learn other languages, including sign language, in Adult or Continuing Education.

    Fact- As for other countries helping us during the war, if you check your history books you will see that we have fought & helped other countries that do not speak English. Again, that has nothing to do with the fact that English is the primary language spoken here! You are mixing apples & oranges.


  69. Ed Darrell says:

    Some of our founders spoke English, yes. They also spoke German, French and Spanish. Jefferson and Madison, among those who argued that no requirement for English was necessary, both read and wrote extensively in Latin and Greek. Jefferson learned French for his work in France, and Italian for a short vacation there. In order to understand scriptures better, he learned Hebrew.

    People who speak more than one language tend to make more money than one-language speakers. While English is spoken in most of the world, the U.S. suffers because science papers that could lead to better health care and more productive industries are not translated — yet — from German, French, Japanese, Spanish and other languages — especially Arabic. The lack of Farsi speakers [not Urdu] probably led directly to the capture of our embassy in Tehran in 1979. The lack of Arabic readers stopped our security services from learning of the planned attacks on the World Trade Center until after it had occurred.

    Oh, you can speak one language if you wish. It’s anti-American to do so, and many of the advocates of one-language America are sunshine patriots only, disrespecting the U.S. flag if they want to in order to promote their odd views.

    Fact: We won our freedom with the services of French-speaking Marquis de Lafayette (one of the greatest treasures George Washington held was a key to the Bastille presented to him by his lifelong friend Lafayette). Fact: The American Revolution was financed by French money; but for the French, Britain would certainly have won well before 1781. Fact: The Battle of Yorktown was won only with the arrival of the French Navy, which cut off General Cornwallis from reinforcements and resupply.

    Fact: Our national seal features Latin, as required by the founders.

    Press “1” for English and a prosperous America. Don’t press “1,” we get economic stagnation, poverty, and probably civil war.

    See Bernarda’s notes about the Star-Spangled Banner in German and Spanish. It has been our national anthem, incidentally, only for about 80 years.

    Let’s discuss this more. Never “enough said” so long as ignorance remains.


  70. missy says:

    I like the song. Fact- Our Founding Fathers spoke English. Fact- The Declarastion Of Independence & The Constitution are in English. Fact- The Star Spangled Banner was written in English. Enough said.


  71. Ed Darrell says:

    why the heck should we have to dial one for English

    Because it’s good for business — that keeps us the top economic powerhouse in the world.

    Be careful what you sacrifice to keep from being educated enough to speak three langauges.


  72. Ed Darrell says:

    Ah, checking things out? Look at the facts:

    The pace of recent U.S. economic growth would have been impossible without immigration. Since 1990, immigrants have contributed to job growth in three main ways: They fill an increasing share of jobs overall, they take jobs in labor-scarce regions, and they fill the types of jobs native workers often shun. The foreign-born make up only 11.3 percent of the U.S. population and 14 percent of the labor force. But amazingly, the flow of foreign-born is so large that immigrants currently account for a larger share of labor force growth than natives.

    Sure, we could stop immigration. Ever heard of “stock market crash?” “Great Depression?”

    Don’t take my word for it, check out the what the economists say:

    That’s right: The Dallas Fed, the most conservative bank in America.

    The economic contributions of immigrants are enormous. With immigrants filling such a significant share of job openings, it is clear the pace of U.S. employment growth is closely tied to the pace of immigration. Official post–9/11 changes have reduced entries of temporary visitors and foreign students and are negatively impacting travel to and from the United States, but it is still unclear what they will mean for the level of permanent immigration. If new policies deter future immigration, this has to be evaluated with respect to national security and economic concerns.

    Meanwhile, post–9/11 political sentiment is having a significant effect on immigrants already here. Potentially beneficial reforms, such as a guest-worker program or a higher H1-B visa cap, have been put on indefinite hold. States are attempting to tackle some immigration issues on their own, such as driver’s licenses and college tuition for undocumented residents.

    Immigration policy not only determines how effectively the United States can compete for foreign workers but also their socioeconomic progress after they have arrived. Both aspects are important to future economic growth. Both also require these policies to be implemented, not just left to languish.

    And as for the U.S. flag “looking” lower — if it were “in front of” the other two, it should appear higher, if it’s a problem of perspective. It’s not perspective. The U.S. flag is flown lower than the other two.

    Anti-immigrants don’t care about America. They’ll sacrifice our economy and lower the U.S. flag to defend their anti-immigrant rants. Shame on them.

    I find it fascinating that Roy Beck (the guy in the video, otherwise unidentified) can get so much wrong about immigration, including saying things about the economics of immigration which are simple hooey, and so few call him on it. Notice also that his graphs are exaggerated because they start at 220 million people. I assume the video is a decade or so old — we passed 300 million Americans last year, and the disasters Beck predicted did not occur. Of course, if one pays attention to the real economics, one understands why: Immigration helps fuel our economic growth. Beck claims the opposite, and he’s wrong.


  73. Catherine says:

    I love this video……..and for the record, at 44 seconds into the video, if you take a second to pause it, it is very obvious that the U.S. flag is standing in front of the two other flags and since this is filmed from behind of course it looks lower.

    “If they have a high school equivalency, they are a big boon to our economy.” Are you serious here? How many of the illegals from Mexico or Central America have a high school diploma? (Or have even made it through grade school.) We’ll never know, but I seriously doubt that many do.

    As for immigration facts and it’s effect upon the economy and resources why don’t you check this out:


  74. Patrick Williams says:

    GWALK: do a Google search on flag protocol. You’ll see that the author of the blog is, in most circumstances, correct. Technically, much of the stuff complained about is disrespectful to the flag.

    Ed Darrell: flag code is CODE, not law. Nobody can arrest you for breaking flag protocol. And while not code approved, flag decals, patches and even flag shirts are currently deemed as acceptable as long as they are not made out of an actual flag (although a flag shirt should not duplicate the flag exactly).

    To the blog author, who I assume really ISN’T Millard Fillmore, but whose actual name I can’t find on this page: the flag istelf is never to be displayed flat (unless draped over a casket). This does not mean that non-flag replicas of the flag cannot be flat. There’s no way that the field of crops depicted to ever be mistaken for an authentic flag, hence, no insult. As to the other etiquette breaches: the Rivoli’s, whether we like what they sang or not, do not owe anyone an apology for showing images of breaches of flag protocol. The people who actually perpetrated these breaches do. I, too, think it’s silly and ironic that they would show the flag being used incorrectly and at the same time claim some correctness in the use of English as our only language. Ah, well.

    To the other respondants to this blog: the Rivoli’s song was about using English as our only language. The blog was about breaches in flag protocol. This is not about immigration whether legal or illegal. Please go foam at the mouth somewhere else.


  75. Ed Darrell says:

    Yeah, that’s the problem: People violate the law, and others who aren’t paying attention see no problem.



  76. GWALK says:

    wHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM WITH THIS VIDEO?? You must have nothing better to do then sit there and come up with this supposed proper flag etiquite.You are probably just jealous that you didn’t come up with this great and sooooooo truthful diddy.Get a life and a job!!! I see no disrespect to our great flag!!!


  77. Ed Darrell says:

    And, no, I don’t think the Rivolis staged the flags they show. But they chose those images, showing the flag being defaced, really. Should we let it pass? They’re trying to pass themselves off as superpatriots, and they insult the U.S. flag? My point was that their images are ill-chosen and uninformed, and so is their rant.

    If you want to discuss immigration, please, check out the website of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank on the subject before you do. Repeated studies over the past decade show immigrants are an enormous boon to our economy. Illegal immigrants are a boon to the economy, too. So before you bite off my nose to spite your face, please look at the facts.


  78. Ed Darrell says:

    Is it okay for U.S. citizens to deface the flag?

    The sort of ignorance of flag etiquette is echoed in the ignorance of U.S. history. We speak English by accident. There has never been a U.S. law specifying language. Early immigrants spoke their native tongues — the English didn’t learn Dutch, nor did they learn Spanish. When U.S. citizens streamed over the border into what is now Texas, they refused to learn Spanish. Parts of New Mexico have been Spanish speaking since 1600.

    If your flag means so much to you, why not study it? If you think immigrants are a problem, why not research the truth? Immigrants — even illegal immigrants — boost our economy. If they have a high school equivalency, they are a big boon to our economy.

    Think about this for a while: Do you want to pay higher taxes simply to justify racism?

    I don’t. Bring in people who want to make this country work, and get off the whining. The claim is that immigrants don’t pay their own way, especially illegal immigrants. Repeated studies show they pay their own way and then some. Why not let them come?


  79. scout21 says:

    First, I would like to said to overcrook is hit the road to Mexico and don’t turn back. Second, I believe that Ron and Kay Rivoli didn’t stage the flags and you total missed the whole point of the song and you’re making a mountain out of a mole hill. That’s probably what you like doing anyway. I’m US citizen and serve this country with my life, did you? I didn’t serve so I had to come back a have to live under the Mexican flag or speak Mexican. Early immigrants realized that they had to learn English when they immigrated here to the U.S.A. The Mexicans are just hurting themselves willing to work for less then minimum wages and not willing to follow the immigration laws of this country. Is it ok for the Mexicans to deface our country’s flag? They say they want to become an American but yet they fly the Mexican flag and don’t want to learn English. If the Mexican flag means so much to them why don’t they just go back. Why, because they want to destroy our way of life our country instead of trying to fixing there own. Think about this comment in 10 years.


  80. Ed Darrell says:

    The Flag Code was amended in the Nixon administration to make it legal for public servants and a few others to put the flag on their uniforms, such as the flags that Boy Scouts wear on their right sleeves. Decals on cars are still not code-approved.


  81. revel says:


    Well, that was certainly educational. I trust the Rivolis’ knew as little about the flag as I did. I wonder–since the flag should only be displayed as flying, are we not owed an apology by everyone that has the emblem enblazened on their shirts–or on a decal on their cars? Or should we chalk that up to shameful ignorance, coupled with the same spirit that this video seems to have been produced out of.

    The buck stops here: I apologize for the decal of a flag on my shirt–and my car.



  82. bernarda says:

    It is sad to see the rampant xenophobia among rightwingers. “Illegal” immigrants? The U.S. signed dozens, if not hundreds of treaties with the Indians and violated everyone of them by letting American illegal immigrants invade sovereign Indian territory. That goes from the Iroquois Nation, to the Cherokees, to the plains Indians and everything in between.

    If these guys are living outside the original 13 states, or even in them in some cases, they are likely to be the descendants of illegal immigrants to Indian land. Just to give the example of the Cherokees. They were expelled from their land in favor of illegal American immigrants and had to walk to Oklahoma, “The Trail of Tears”. Later, illegal American immigrants were allowed to invade their land in Oklahoma.

    Get the DVD “The 500 Nations” if you are allergic to reading history.


  83. Ed Darrell says:

    I say let’s go back to the immigration laws that the founders created, okay, Bill? W. J. Fisher?

    They said let all comers in. No visas. Get to the U.S., make a life.

    I figure, if it was good enough for George Washington, good enough for John Adams, good enough for Thomas Jefferson, good enough for James Madison, good enough for Quincy, Jackson . . . Lincoln — it ought to be good enough for us.


  84. Bill says:

    We have up to 30 million foreign invaders, elected officials who have sworn to defend the Constitution and don’t (defending our borders is one of those duties!) and this is your way to pick a nit?
    Check out Mexico’s immigration laws sometime……. yes. let’s say Mexico because that’s where most of the invaders are from.


  85. w j fisher says:

    Horse hockey to detractors of the song Press one for English.
    why the heck should we have to dial one for English
    why should we allow millions to commit a serious crime against the country by entering it illegally with illegal documents?

    This is a daggone good song, and I hope that it gets hugely popular and causes a backlash against the criminals who are sneaking in [the very act of sneaking in is a criminal offense]
    If you are so kind as to leave the country’s doors unlocked, then leave your house, business and car unlocked


  86. bernarda says:

    A lovely hymn to ignorance at a time when the army lacks people who can speak arabic, in part because of its anti-gay rules.

    There was a similar debate about the National Anthem and whether it should be sung only in English.

    Of course that would cause a problem for GWB himself.

    Unfortunately for GWB and associates, the government itself had commissioned a Spanish language version back in 1919.

    The U.S. government even has it on a website.

    It is also in German since the 1860’s.


  87. onlycrook says:

    Even without violations of the flag code, that was an annoying sentiment and song. Why did 5 or 6 people send you the link? I’d love to drop Kay Rivoli in the middle of Honduras and let her sing her way back to the U.S.


Please play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes. While your e-mail will not show with comments, note that it is our policy not to allow false e-mail addresses. Comments with non-working e-mail addresses may be deleted.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: