Speak English, Please

   By Florida Bill  

                                             The United States is truly an exceptional nation.  But in its 200 plus years of existence--and I would bet that a lot of people do not know this--no one ever succeeded in making "English" the official language of the country.
                                              Routinely, proposals for "Official English" are introduced in Congress.  There is often a good deal of talk and predictions that it will become law, but ultimately the bill dies until its resurrection in a future session.  It seems like it ought to be a slam-dunk, but it isn't.  
                                              Iowa Representative Steve King has a bill pending in Congress seeking to have English declared as the nation's official language.  His confidence in its passage has increased with the election of President Trump whose has made "America First" a priority with his administration.  
                                              Europe, it might be noted, has some 50 nations and each has its own official language, and I suspect that residents have pride in their homeland, as America does.  Many Europeans actually speak more than one language which often includes English, but in their home territory there is an official tongue.  In Spain it is Spanish;  in France it is French; in Germany, it is German,  and in Italy, it is Italian.  The United Kingdom has declared English as its official language as have some surprising spots like Gambia, Ghana, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.  Official English in many, many places---but not in the United States.  
                                              There are roughly 6,500 spoken languages in the world today.  The most popular tongue is Mandarin Chinese with 1.2 billion persons speaking that language.  If you go to China and insist on speaking a language other than Chinese, and then try to demand government services in your foreign tongue, you won't get too far.  What you will get is the China boot.                         
                                              America is the world's most generous and exceptional nation, where everything is laid out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights--but no language is official.  Thirty-two of the 50 sovereign states have enacted a law declaring English as its official and primary language inside its state lines, and five states currently have legislation pending toward that end.  So why isn't English the official language of the USA, asks King, Congress' most aggressive proponent of English as the nation's official language. 
                                            English is the language used for legislation, regulations, executive orders, treaties, federal court rulings, and all other official pronouncements so why not clear the table and have "English" receive its rightful and legitimate blessing, said King. Then there would be something to back us up when we say to our  legal (and illegal) visitors, "Learn English!" 
                                            Researchers tell us that around 90 per cent of Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, favor the declaration, yet the years pass and legislation is considered, but nothing ever happens.  Somehow, with "political correctness" going full tilt, the idea of requiring immigrants to learn English is seen in liberal corners as a "tool of oppression," bordering on racism.  
                                           Former President Obama believed that immigrants ought to learn English, but he saw a declaration by the nation that English is its official language as sort of unsportsman-like to immigrants. "Nonsense" said King.  English is the dominant language in the USA, and Spanish is second, although depending on where you live, it may seem that order is reversed.   
                                           As a senator from Illinois, Obama voted four times against bills calling for English as the national language.  But he was not alone.  Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden opposed it also, as did more than 30 other senators, mostly liberal Democrats.    It's unfair to immigrants to face this language burden, argues Obama, who has suggested that instead, Americans just learn to speak Spanish and then everyone would be bilingual. 
                                          President Obama stood in real contrast to other presidents, including Pres. Clinton, who favored English as the language of America.  One, in particular, Theodore Roosevelt, had plenty to say on the subject, as he extended a warm and friendly hand to immigrants, but there were caveats. 
                                          "In the first place," he said, "we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith and becomes an American and assimilates himself to us--  he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else... There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, is not an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."   
                                           In recent months, we have heard  President Trump point to the importance of speaking English.          "We will stop apologizing for America, and we will start celebrating America," Trump has asserted. "We will be united by our common culture, values and principles, becoming one American nation, and one country, under one constitution,  saluting one American flag," 
                                           Congressman King, has been a fierce proponent of official "English" in America and particularly when applied to immigrants.  King has argued that establishing an official language like other countries would bring consistency and unity. With the new President, whose patriotism and love of country is worn on his sleeve, and who has said that under his administration, "America will come first,"  there is increased optimism that "English" will at long last become the official language of the United States.  Correspondingly, immigrants would be obligated to speak English if they are to assimilate into the American way of life. 
                                                xxx

                                     



                                   
        
             
                                                   
                                               

                                             
            

We're Leaving this Country.

  By Florida Bill          

                           Over the many months of the brutal, hard-fought political battle between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, there have been announcements and promises by a number of so-called celebrities that they would be leaving America if "The Donald" were elected president. 
                           The possibility of their departure was indifference or really good news, and their promises actually became an unanticipated incentive to support now President-Elect Trump.   The bad news is that they were all hollow pledges and unfortunately it appears they all will be staying in this land that has made them millionaires many times over.    
                           I think that it is Samuel L. Jackson, the bespectacled actor who does an awful lot of commercials and is worth about $160 million,  who has best articulated the disappointment in a Trump victory.   “If that motherf---er becomes president, I’m moving my black ass to South Africa," thundered Jackson in a Jimmy Kimmel interview.  But after the Trump victory, Jackson was not packing his bags and he pooh poohed his avowal as a kind of "skit talk" typical of big stars like him.  "When you learn the difference between my actual opinion and a 'skit,' maybe we can talk, and till then, I'm barbed wire up your asses."  
                          I get the message--Jackson is not leaving, and that is disappointing. His point of being barbed wire stuck in your colon is his way of making a political point, I guess; but what is it?
                          But Jackson was only one of a couple of dozen men and women in the public eye who said they would be up and away if Trump were to become President. Some famous singers like Madonna, Cher,  Streisand and little Miley Cyrus got in their licks on Trump and were out front with their promises.  
                          I think that the aging Madonna (now 58)   got things going when she promised sexual favors to persons who could prove that they had voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton, presuming of course that Hillary was the winner.   Thereafter, the cast of characters began appearing on talk shows, in videos and in interviews vowing to punish the USA by blowing town in the untoward event of a Trump win.
                         Cher and Barbra Streisand were hard-line, yet subdued with their disapprobation of Trump.  "If elected, I'm moving to Jupiter," asserted Cher, 70.  Streisand, 74, who twitches with hate at the very mention of a Republican, explained to Australian journalist Michael Usher her annoyance with the biased, bigoted, hateful Trump. "I'm either coming to your country (Australia)  if you'll let me in, or I'll go to Canada."     
                          Miley Cyrus, the 23-year-old pop star with the foot-long tongue and the dirty mouth, had been incensed that Trump was a candidate for President.  He is a "f...ing nightmare," she said, promising to "move outta da country” if he won the presidency; "and I don't say things I don't mean"! But with votes counted, Miley doesn't really mean it, disappointing millions with her double cross.  Asked when she would be leaving this country where she has accumulated a net worth of $200 million, she said that it "hurts to say, but I accept you (Trump) as President of the United States, and that’s fine, because, now, I want to be a hopeful hippie.  Please treat people with love, treat people with compassion, and I will do the same for you."  Well, Mr. President, you now have Miley on your team. No doubt, that must improve your day.
                            But there is no overlooking the sentiments of Al Sharpton, the New York-based, hissing,  race-baiting friend of President Obama; and the vulgar, unlikeable woman who identifies so closely with him --Whoopi Goldberg.  "I'm reserving my ticket to get outta here if he wins, only because he'd probably have me deported anyway," said Sharpton.  But, Rev. Al, the election is history and you're still here. "Just a joke," said the race hustler who has to be nervous about the Trump-appointed Attorney General, who may well put his cross hairs on Sharpton.  Among Trump fans, Sharpton is known as a charlatan who owes plenty in unpaid income taxes. Had not Sharpton been a close pal of President Obama's, he might be behind bars for tax evasion.  So Al, it might be smart if you do reconsider, and leave.      

.                       Whoopie lets go with a vulgar spiel whenever she gets the urge.  As to Trump, she said on the View, "maybe its time for me to move, you know.  I can afford to go...Trump is not the president I want and with him around, it just sort of pisses me off." She has such intelligence and finesse in her pronouncements.                                         There is a young comedienne named Amy Schumer, a cousin of "Cry'in Chuck Schumer," Democrat senator from New York.  She gave notice that her destination was Spain if Trump became president. The 36-year-old Amy became famous with her book, The Girl with the Lower Back Tattoo, which told of her sexual activities, and it gained quite a readership. Trump's election would be "beyond my comprehension; just too crazy," she had opined.  Learning of the sad news of his election, Amy said her comments were  "in jest" and her amended plan is to "stay and fight---today we grieve and tomorrow we begin again." So Amy is staying, fairly well-fixed, and steering clear of any grand larceny charges such as she faced some years ago. Is anyone "crying" about Amy? 
                        Two actors of some note generated attention with their denouncements of Candidate Trump.  If he is in, I am out of here said Bryan Cranston, who gained fame in the TV series "Breaking Bad"  and also as Dr. Wattley, the dentist, in episodes of the Jerry Seinfeld show.
                        "Absolutely--going for sure," said Cranston with Canada as the destination. No worry now, Bryan has changed his mind. He explained he will remain in America, in the camera's eye. His film brother in the movie-making business is tough Robert De Niro, who said  that  because of Trump, he is "very depressed."   "He's a punk. He's a dog. He's a pig. He's a con, a bull s--- artist," said  DeNiro, a man of great emotions.            
                               In a monologue posted on line, DeNiro called Trump an "embarrassment" and said he would like to "punch him in the face."  But the tough Italian has got movies to make and he is staying in America.  But President Trump, please be on guard.   

                             There has been a lot of talk about the U.S. Supreme court and Trump's ability to make appointments.   But one sitting justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, has castigated Trump as a "faker" and has said that his presence on the political scene brought to mind the sentiments of her late husband, who once opined that "perhaps now is the time for us to move to New Zealand."  But Justice Ginsberg, 83, apparently had decided that she is just too old to travel, so she apparently will be staying in her black robes fighting against social injustices.  Also, she has said she  "regrets" her comments.  
                                   There is one promisor, Comedian George Lopez, who has not yet double crossed America.  He says that he will be returning to the land of his fathers, Mexico.  But I say, don't count on it.  George, with his net worth of 35 million dollars, has found a permanent home here--remember, George is a comedian.    
                                         Yes, there are a good many unhappy celebs and those wishing to be treated as celebrities who have promised to disappear from the rolling hills of the USA.   Here is a list of those betraying their promises (and the hopes of millions), and the places they are (not) going to: Rosie O'Donnell (Canada); Eddie Griffin, (Africa); Omari Hardwick, (Italy); Natasha Lyonne, (a Mental Hospital); Kathryn Hahn, (Iceland); Zosia Mamet, (Siberia); Neve Campbell, (Canada); Keegan Michael Key, (Canada); and Armie Hammer, (the Caribbean).    
                                            So its all over and everyone has decided to stay in this land of milk and honey with Donald Trump in the White House. So thanks for that. Even the famous author Steven King, who had vowed to go to Canada because of fear of the Trump presidency and the evil it can bring about, has changed his mind and, by the way, I hear that his next scary novel will be out soon.  

          

                                                                  XXX


.









              




              

Comey, Twisting in the Wind

   By Florida Bill  

                                                      The election is over and Donald Trump was the first to reach 270 electoral votes, and thus is the President-elect, no matter how many popular votes Hillary Clinton received or how many of her followers take to the streets in protest. In the midst of this most unusual presidential campaign and election, with his fingers stuck deep in the political fray, is FBI Director James Comey and just maybe he has some explaining to do.                                                            It is difficult at this point to determine where Comey stands now that Trump is in charge and Mrs. Clinton is licking her wounds, feeling hurt by the behavior of the director who was appointed to the post in 2013 by Clinton's boss and supporter, President Obama.  Comey's term is for 10 years, but there are big questions as to his future.  Resignation, I detect, is a real possibility with Trump as the new President, and I sense that he is a man who likes to even scores.  

                                      Mrs. Clinton blames Comey for her loss with his on-again, off-again investigations of her alleged mishandling of classified emails. She has said that his conduct in reopening the investigation 11 days before the election, with early voting in full swing, and then calling it off again three days before the November 8 voting,  had a deleterious effect on her supporters and reversed her "momentum."  It energized Trump supporters, she added in a recent interview.  Not surprisingly, former Atty. Gen. Eric Holder agreed that Comey's behavior "impacted" the results. 
                                     And now Comey is getting upbraided by  Senate minority leader, Harry Reid and other unhappy Democrats, and they want Comey investigated by everyone and anyone who does investigations, convinced that a double-dealing Comey caused Clinton to lose the election.  Reid has charged that Comey knew of Russia sneakily hacking Clinton emails which made her look dishonest and passed them on to Wikileaks which them published them.  Trump was the benefactor, and Comey is a cuplable party and ought to resign, Reid charges.                                              
                                    In July, after 15 months of investigation into her email use, Director Comey cleared Clinton of any criminal wrong doing.  Trump promptly and angrily accused Comey of caving into Democratic pressure.  Comey's announcement appeared to put the email question to rest, and Reid commended him for his good work.  But then came a whopping surprise.  On October 28th, 11 days before the election, Director Comey alerted Congressional leaders in a letter that he was reopening the bureau's inquiry into Clinton's possible criminal conduct, and Trump commended Comey for finally doing the right thing. 
                                       But then, three days before the election, in an unbelievable turn around, Comey said that the investigation was concluded and potential new evidence proved meaningless to any Clinton culpability. The evidence to which he referred involved some 650,000 new emails which had been linked to Mrs.Clinton through a connection with the sexually troubled former Congressman Anthony Wiener, the estranged husband of Mrs. Clinton's close aide and friend, Huma Abedin.   At that point, Trump retracted his praise of Comey whom he believed had again caved into political pressure from Democrats. At at that turn, both Democrats and Republicans were angry and critical of the FBI Director's handling of these matters.  
                                        Considering all of the peculiar about-faces by the head of the world's most trusted investigative agency, I believe that the 55-year-old Comey is now in a sort of limbo, wondering which powerful politician he has ticked off more, and what's ahead for him. Back in the Watergate days of the early 1970s, the Nixon team made interim FBI Director L. Patrick Gray a fall guy and said he should be left "to twist slowly, slowly in the wind." Nixon was unsuccessful in that regard, but now with Trump at the wheel, Comey has to be feeling the breeze. 
                                         Comey's background is that of a man who has climbed straight up.  He assumed the office of director with fanfare and approbation as a man of integrity who could be trusted to do his job without preordained prejudices.  His reputation was "impeccable,"  As an attorney, and a 1985 graduate of the far left University of Chicago law school, he enjoyed the friendship of President Obama who had been a lecturer at the law school.  Striding through Washington's halls of power at a towering 6 feet, 8 inches tall, he carried himself with dignity and the aplomb of an untouchable. 
                                          Comey has worked for government for a good piece of his adult life, although he was employed for periods as an associate in a law firm and has held positions as general counsel for a number of large companies and organizations. For a period he served as the United States Attorney from the southern district of New York and from 2003 to 2005 as deputy attorney general, second in power only to the cabinet level Attorney General in the department of Justice.
                                           In February, 2003, Comey led the successful prosecution of Martha Stewart on charges of securities fraud, obstruction of Justice and lying to an FBI agent.  "This criminal case is about lying--lying to he FBI, lying to the SEC and lying to investors. Martha Stewart is being prosecuted not for who she is, but because of what she did." Comey explained at a press conference.  
                                           Comey critics are hinting that the director possesses a hidden undefined allegiance to Mrs. Clinton and her husband, the former President. That speculation comes from the belief that Comey gave Mrs. Clinton a pass from criminal prosecution despite clear evidence of wrong doing. The use of velvet gloves with the Democratic nominee for president was in sharp contrast to the hammer he brought down on Martha Stewart whose misdeeds appeared less serious from those of Mrs. Clinton's. 
                                            Comey also was said to have been overly kind to President Clinton's friend, Sandy Berger, who in 2004, was caught pirating documents from the National Archives by stuffing them into his coat.  Some of the purloined documents taken by Berger, who had served as President Clinton's National Security advisor, were destroyed by him fueling speculation that the papers contained information negative to the president's handling of defense matters.    "No one will ever know what the destroyed documents contained, but you can bet your bottom dollar that they weren’t Bill Clinton’s secret recipes for chicken a la king," observed Pat Buchanan, a prominent Republican commentator and former Presidential candidate. 
                                             During the rather bloody campaign, Trump characterized Mrs. Clinton as "Crooked Hillary" and promised during a debate that if he became President he would pursue prosecution of her for her crimes which the FBI had ignored. Asked about this during a recent interview on 60 Minutes, the President-elect said that he would "think about that."
                                              There also is belief by insiders that the FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation, established by Hillary and Bill Clinton, concerning allegations made by Trump and others that Mrs. Clinton, while serving as Secretary of State,   employed "pay to play" rules as a way of her granting favors to individuals donating to the foundation. 
                                               FBI Director Comey's role in the investigations is sensitive after all that has gone on.  Fox News' Bill O'Reilly has come down hard on Comey saying that he believes that the FBI chief took a dive on behalf of Mrs. Clinton.  "What other explanation is there for these crazy events linked to the campaign." Newt Gingrich, a former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and a strong supporter of the president-elect,  has tweeted that Comey must be under "enormous pressure" to cave the way he has....  "His destruction by political pressure is painful to watch."  He has been "twisted into an indefensible pretzel of contradictions."                                              .                                              If Comey's actions contributed to Mrs. Clinton's loss, many conservatives will applaud him.  But I feel that his conduct as FBI director was so unusual , confusing and possibly improper that he must explain his behavior. 

                                                 xxx

What Went Wrong With the Polling?

   By Florida Bill  

                                 After the unanticipated election of Donald Trump, contradicting 99 per cent of the polls, the pundits exhibited amazement.   "Just what went wrong and how did it happen" asked super-liberal Anderson Cooper from his loft at the CNN station.
                                  It was  going to be the greatest blowout drubbing of a Republican since the defeat handed Barry Goldwater in 1964 by President Johnson.  Make book on that, the analysts advised.
                                Actually Cooper and his wise German-born sage and colleague, Wolf Blitzer, were simply drowning their sorrows that Trump, whom they disdained, had handily defeated their heroine, Democrat Hillary Clinton, and the polls which they commissioned, along with others, were way, way off. 
                                  The long and short of it is that the polls ran wild and were not a bell ringer of the preferences of a nation, but rather served only as the source of inane and endless chit chat by the talking electronic heads.  Polls and surveys make news in the political season and the pundits rely upon them for endless babble.  Some shotgun polls come out so fast that you have  to wonder if there ever was a poll which involved the telephoning of 500 persons.  Did someone simply find a way to write that there was a poll, deliver a press release to the TV stations and submit a bill for work done?  
                                   In any case, if all of the polls and surveys which supposedly had been taken really were legitimate, then 99 per cent of them got it wrong. It is likely that pollsters like to produce the results which would most please the companies and organizations which commission them to take the survey.  Presto, if you want to make Clinton the preferred candidate, just ask the residents of Washington D.C. or the African Americans in Harlem.  It all depends upon whom you ask and how and where you ask it, sometimes even when. 
                               For me, and for others, including the intuitive former Chicago Tribune Labor editor Jim Strong, we see the polls as just so much horse feathers. Everyone is eating up those polls, and the pundits have plenty to talk about.  This is what the political season is all about, it seems: extrapolating the intentions of the nation, based on a handful of supposedly representative telephone and exit surveys.  "Rubbish," quipped Strong.  
                                  I have for quite a spell been skeptical of the polls and the so-called error factor of three per cent. This three per cent nonsense is just so much invented scientific rhetoric so as to add legitimacy to the "art" of surveying and polls based upon telephone inquiries to some 500 to 1,000 persons.  Does anyone really buy the theory that asking a few hundred persons on the telephone of their preferences will reveal the inner heartbeat of a nation of 310 million Americans, residing in 19,000 cities, towns and villages,  spread over 50 states and extending over 3 million square miles of land and water?  If they do, I have a bridge for the highest bidder. 
                                   There may be some real legitimacy in surveys designed to tell us the desires of a particular area with 10,000 persons based upon telephoning 500 persons.  But saying that a review of answers from that number of persons will expose the true desires of the USA is beyond reality. 
                                     In one polling book I found in the library, the aim for pollsters is to get answers by interviewing a selected sample of Americans.  These targets must look and act like the larger population they come from in every important way.  The sample must have almost exactly the same proportions of men and women, blacks, whites and Hispanics; Democrats and Republicans and old and young people as in the entire population. This small sampling is supposedly accurate to within plus or minus three percentage points.  I wonder how often pollsters adhered to those guidelines. And even if they slavishly stuck to their "snapshot," what if large numbers of one representative group or another simply read their caller IDs and decided not to answer the phone? Wouldn't that throw everything off?
                                    In this political season which got moving back in the early months of 2015, there have been polls and surveys in the thousands and thousands. They are commissioned by everyone and anyone.  Prominent pollsters firing out results almost daily are NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, and FOX  from the TV tube; and singular or combo polls results from the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times and from a host of smaller papers and organizations.  And then there are the trusted polling granddads like Gallup, Rasmussen, Bloomberg, Emerson, Landmark, Reuters, and Quinnipiac. 
                                     Now, in this race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the big shots of polling like the New York Times were reporting that Clinton was an 85 per cent certainty to "trounce Trump."  Other pollsters simply took their lead from the  polling guns and followed up on their findings based on who knows what.  And always we heard about the 3 per cent margin of error, all of that playing to the scholars to get them to believe in the science of the inquiries. 
                                      I have an idea that the pollsters have discovered a way of making a whole lot of money by doing not much at all.  Consider rounding up a some ten telephone talkers and signing them on for minimum wage.  Find a big table and rig it with telephones and a script with questions and let them fill in the responses.  Give these telemarketers or what ever they are called numbers to call and pick the areas.  If you want some big Clinton Democratic numbers call Chicago which hasn't heard the word "Republican" since the 1930s.  Its Clinton cruising to victory.
                                          The pollsters then assemble the data and fashion it into a press release for distribution to the television talking news heads and the reporters on a news paper.  Presto, you have a poll and when you put it all together with the so called plus and minus 3 percentage points nonsense, the prediction is out there.  Clinton is way ahead.  But be mindful of the old admonition,  "garbage in--garbage out." 
                                           It seems that the election of 2016 may be the final proof that polling is neither an art nor a science.
                                            
                                                  XXX