Romney Vs. Santorum Vs. Obama

[Rick]

My foreign policy is simple, pay tribute or I will support your enemies...

[Sue U]

I was hoping to wake up today to a headline reading "Romney Licks Santorum In Southern Contest." But I guess I'll have to wait.

Now feeling the heat, will Rmoney resort to smearing Santorum all over Illinois?











(I'm just gross today.)

[Gob]

You're a bad girl Sue!

[Scooter]

So instead, the headline reads "Santorum Creams Romney".

[Beer Sponge]

What about "Santorum all over Romney in the South"?

[Lord Jim]

[dales]

Now now, Jim....

A little foreplay wordplay never hurt anyone.

[Beer Sponge]

Not likely!

[Lord Jim]

Don't make me come over there, mister...

[Grim Reaper]

And Mr. Santorum says Puerto Rico must make English their primary language if they want to become a state.

[Scooter]

It's funny how strict constructionists manage to invent such blatantly unconstitutional garbage when it suits them.

[Sue U]

Wait, you mean Rick Santorum doesn't know what he's talking about?

[Crackpot]

Hey go easy on tiny face

[Scooter]

[dgs49]

Rick has this crazy idea that it's not good to have a State which rejects the predominant language and culture, and which wants to have an election every couple years on whether to split off from the rest of the country.

You know, like...Canada?

Rick said nothing about a Constitutional issue and nothing is implied. But how can you be part of the U.S., when half the citizens can't even understand what the President is saying without a translator?

[Scooter]

What he said was that Puerto Ricans would "have to" make English their primary language if they wanted statehood. Not "should", not "it would be a good idea" but "have to". And yes, that flies completely in the face of the Constitution, which imposes no such requirement.

Canada hasn't had any sort of referendum on anyone wanting to split off from the rest of the country for 17 years. Unless, of course, you count the last federal election in which the separatist party in Quebec lost over 90% of their seats. Since you have consistently demonstrated abject ignorance of your own political system, it's probably a good idea that you don't attempt to comment on anyone else's.

And GWB spoke in a way that was completely unintelligible to at least half the populace, so I can't see how Spanish-speaking Puerto Ricans would have been at any more of a disadvantage...

[Lord Jim]

that flies completely in the face of the Constitution,

Actually, I looked into this some, and it seems kind of interesting.

Here's the clause of the Constitution that governs the admission of states, (Article 4, Section 3):

"New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."

There's nothing there that in clear language that would prohibit Congress from attaching a condition to the admission of a new state that isn't a condition of the existing ones.

And then there's this:

The Constitution does not require that states be admitted on an "equal footing" with the original states. In fact, the Constitutional Convention rejected a proposal requiring the equality of new states.

But, there's also this:

Congressional restrictions on the equality of states, even when those limitations have been found in the acts of admission, have been held void by the Supreme Court.

For instance the Supreme Court struck down a provision which limited the jurisdiction of the state of Alabama over navigable waters within the state. The Court held,

Alabama is, therefore, entitled to the sovereignty and jurisdiction over all the territory within her limits ... to maintain any other doctrine, is to deny that Alabama has been admitted into the union on an equal footing with the original states ... to Alabama belong the navigable waters and soils under them.

Both quotes taken from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Fo ... nstitution

So here's how this looks to me:

There would be nothing per se prohibiting Congress from attaching a provision that Puerto Rico formally adopt English as it's primary or official language as a condition for admission into the Union even though no other state has such a requirement...

However the definite possibility exists that it could be struck down...

Now this is where I think this gets interesting:

It seems to me that 'equal footing" could easily be argued in favor of such a requirement, as well as against. One could quite logically argue that Puerto Rico's unique status as a primarily Spanish speaking territory would put it at a disadvantage vis a vis the other fifty states (in interstate commerce, for example) who's defacto primary language is English, and that therefore the requirement, rather than denying "equal footing" enables it....

I don't know whether or not that argument would prevail, but it's certainly a reasonable one to make....

ETA:

Of course we'd want to be even handed about this...

If and when Australia applies for statehood, obviously the condition requiring that first they adopt English as their primary language would be equally appropriate...

[Long Run]

It is a reasonable position to say that Puerto Rico's admission as a state is premised on its adoption of English as its primary language (however they go about trying to implement that)al. It also reasonable to disagree with that position. Neither position is outrageous. Nothing in the Constitution said Utah had to outlaw polygamy to be admitted as a state, but that was definitely a requirement for the politicians who were deciding on extending an invitation to join the U.S.

[Scooter]

And if Utah had re-legalized polygamy once becoming a state, what could Congress have done about it? Absolutely nothing. Ditto requiring Puerto Rico to declare itself English-speaking, particularly when several existing states have explicitly rejected doing so.

[Sue U]

So you're now abandoning the concept of supporting states' rights and opposing dictates from Washington?

Right now Spanish and English are both official on the island, and the idea that English should take precedence irritates many Puerto Ricans, including [Luis] Fortuno [Puerto Rico's governor, who is both a Republican and the leader of Puerto Rico's pro-statehood party.]

"Let me tell you," he says, sternly. "We polled this issue. Over 90 percent of parents in Puerto Rico want their children to be totally fluent in English. That's not an issue. For me, it's a states' rights issue. I resent Washington telling states, or the residents of those states, what to do and what to think.

"I am making sure, as the governor of a territory, that our kids speak fluent English," he says. "But having said that, I will tell my wife I love her in Spanish, and I will pray in Spanish, and no one from Washington should come down here and tell us how to go about it."

http://www.npr.org/2012/02/28/147572976 ... ttleground