English as Official Language Represents "Politically Toxic" Issue; Chance to Unify the Nation

Whatever one may think of Karl Rove, it must be concluded: "he's a brilliant, contemporary political mind."

When Rove refers to an issue as "toxic," wise men pay heed. If you don't belief it, ask Texas Governor, Rick Perry! He learned quickly that the "truth can be deadly." Especially when he described Social Security as a "Ponzi Scheme." Never mind that he was right! When you embark upon verboten topics with truthful candor, even would be allies can turn on you! Perhaps that is why political leaders have been slow to turn up the heat on "English only."

According to U.S. English, as many as 90% of Americans favor making English the official language in the United States. "Pro English" and "English First," two other Washington based English advocacy foundations seconded the assertion. State by state, brick by brick progress is being made. But there are setbacks. HR 997, which has languished in committee for years is likely to make it through the House of Representatives in 2012. There it will remain until 2013, with the hope that Republicans will retake the Senate. As "Pro English" Communication Director, Phil Tignino reminded, "Harry Reid will not allow the measure to come to a floor vote."

The question becomes, "why?"

Why would the Senate Majority leader block legislation that is favored by 90% of the population? Simple. Harry Reid and friends see "English only" as the ultimate weapon to destroy the "Plebyeih"(Pronounced PLEB-YEA-IH) in America.

"Why" would any responsible leader want to maintain a segment of ignorant,illiterate, know nothings labeled "Plebyeih?" We are using the Russian word, because there is no English equivalent. The label was coined by the bourgeoisie in the Soviet Union during and shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution. "Plebyeih" were frequently seen in the streets of cities carrying banners and spouting Communist Party slogans.

For the record, Karl Rove never described "English only" as a "toxic issue." But he has made minimal mention of it. Rick Santorum took the issue to head in the Puerto Rico primary. Desperate to maintain momentum, Mitt Romney assumed the counter position. This was the politically correct posture and consistent with Washington leadership. While important and relevant, the issue of "English only" could antagonize certain elements. But who are they?

Deeper analysis of the "English only" question reveals a graphic glimpse of the dark side of America. Actually, there are two "dark sides." Let's first look at Harry Reid's argument.

For Communism to work in America, there must be a "Plebyeih." They represent a solid voting block necessary to wage class warfare. This segment can't read at a fourth grade level. They are typically poor and live on government relief. They are the most susceptible to the politics of jealously. It is easy to convince them that the system is rigged against them.

Plebyeih aren't necessarily children of immigrants. Most actually are not. But underachieving newcomers without the language are easy targets for recruitment. Reid and company see "English only" as the first rung in dismantling this important block of voters. That's why they are fighting "English only" so voraciously! The immigration issue is directly linked to maintaining a potent "Plebyeih."

It's probable that Rove has described "immigration reform" as another "toxic issue." It is. Marco Rubio learned that Tea Party support may evaporate following his efforts to produce something contrary to "unconditional deportation." Give him credit for tackling the problem! "McCain-Kennedy" was "amnesty," and nothing less. Presidents Bush and Obama supported "McCain-Kennedy." The D.R.E.A.M. Act had mostly partisan support. Rubio's idea is a scaled down version. Learning English has always been a part of all proposals. But there has never been a direct link to assimilation and citizenship in any plan. The same could be said for voter identification cards.

When you mention voter I.D. cards, Reid and his friends cry foul! According to Reverend Al Sharpton, this is nothing more than a tool of discrimination. In his mind(and obviously scores of Democrats)proponents of "English only," voter I.D. cards and anti-amnesty positions are racists, bigots, fascists and imperialists. Sharpton and evidently Reid believe that open borders, no official language and no required documentation lead to a better America, and maybe more Democrat voters.

Harry Reid's reasoning is relatively easy to fathom. The key to power within his party is grow the "Plebyeih." That equates to the continued "dumbing down" of large segments of the population. The more "Plebyeih" the better! When you have more than 50% of the country paying nothing into the system, Reid and cohorts will have won.

Mitt Romney certainly doesn't support this position! But what does he support? Spanish as the second official language? In witnessing his words in Puerto Rico, it would be logical to assume as much! Or maybe, he was just being his "trimmer" self?" There is always the third possibility, which brings us to the second dark side of America.

The very notion of "English only" reflects "excellence" in English. Totally zealous advocates such as myself strive for Americans to be the "masters of the English language." Better, even than the English themselves. Is this unrealistic? No. In fact, it opens the door to making the country stronger, smarter and more secure. Isn't this Governor Romney's objective?

Yes. Within reason. Like any noble cause "excellence in English," initiated by "English only" can have a negative backlash! The sequence is predictable.

In "E" is for English, "English only voting ballots" and "English only drivers license testing" are proposed. The position is supported by both "Pro English" and "English First." But the book goes one step further. While removing all other languages from government, it mandates six years of a second language in the public schools.The premise is simple: English understanding improves when a second language is formally learned. Producing multilingual high school graduates would result in a more cosmopolitan, more sophisticated society.

It's easy to understand why Reid, Sharpton and associates would fight such a measure. But Mitt Romney? In getting to know him, one would assume that he would embrace such action. Regretfully,"where there are roses there are thorns."

Under this practice America would be producing many more candidates for the service sector workplace. That, in in itself could pose a problem! A high school graduate would emerge bi-lingual, and likely unemployed. The book proposes making offshore outsourcing illegal for any job requiring the use of even part of an American's social security number.

Identity Theft is the fastest growing crime in America. There is growing suspicion that the rise is linked to the large numbers of service sector jobs that have been shipped to India, the Philippines and Central America. Fortune 500 companies would "howl" if such a standard became law. They would predict higher prices for everything, due to the expense equated with hiring American workers. This would almost certainly be Mitt Romney's stance.

The case has been made that "English only" will ultimately contribute to improved English literacy in America. In an abstract way, it's possible to link "Immigration reform" to "English only." But how does identity theft relate to "English only?"

An American monopoly on service sector jobs could be the end result of "English only." The rest of the world would be dismayed to learn that the United States had taken the position that "only Americans could be trusted with Americans social security numbers." It is a position totally contrary to that of globalists. For stockholders, it could prove costly.

In his book, "The World is Flat,"Thomas Friedman described a globalist intention to level the world's playing field. They would facilitate the super rich while bringing peace, harmony and economic parity to the inhabitants of our world. The proposed legislation unveiled in "E" is for English would, in the words of University of Kentucky ESL Professor, Dr. Kay Combs "run contrary" to this objective.

The idea of "English only" in America is the beginning. What's especially dangerous to both Communists and Globalists is that an overwhelming majority of Americans support it! The next step is to build a coalition. That coalition begins with those wanting to curtail identity theft. 100% of the country acknowledges the problem. Even Karl Rove would admit that Identity Theft curtailment is not a toxic issue!

From there we move to the next toxic issue: Immigration Reform. "E" is for English introduced a plan that deals with the present and future. It is directly linked to English proficiency. It would stipulate that anyone who planned to drive, work and vote in America, learn English. For newcomers it would amount to "accelerated assimilation." For illiterates with American roots spanning generations, it would finally mean "inclusion." Which bring us to the final toxic issue: Literacy.

None of the "English only" foundations have spoken the unthinkable. But I will and I did in "E" is for English. We are at a point in America where we must destroy the "Plebyeih." We simply cannot have Americans who are illiterate in English. English is the strand that binds us as one. It transcends all differences. Race, color, creed, sex, national origin, religious preference, it covers them all! We must accept nothing less than totally literacy. We must insure that every American has access to the American Dream.

Requiring a "fourth grade English proficiency test" as a prerequisite for a voter I.D. card will do it. Yes, this is a tough, new standard. It will take a constitutional amendment to do it. But, when we raise the bar, we will be saving millions from illiteracy and ignorance. True, literate masses are more difficult to control than illiterate masses. That's why Harry Reid and like minded "Plebyeih proponents" so vehemently oppose "English only." They would prefer an illiterate, Balkanized America.

This proposal is the ultimate in political incorrectness. It likely sets the gold standard for toxic issues!

"Would the majority of Americans favor it?" I believe that they would!

"English only" foundations have enjoyed marginal success. But the main objective remains unresolved for want of the right coalition. When joined by anti-identity theft groups,anti-voter fraud activists, and those wanting "fair, practical and comprehensive" immigration reform measures, the numbers are there. The education "purists" will follow. When opponents of "English only" are properly positioned as "Communists and Globalists" the battle lines will be drawn.

One remaining question: "Should we be satisfied with HR 997? Or, should we take advantage of the overwhelming support for "English only" to fix other needs?"

"E" is for English's aim is to "create a stronger, smarter, more secure America." Could we use "English only" as the catalyst for reforming immigration, eliminating voter fraud and curtailing identity theft? The book's proposed "American English Unification Amendment"("E" Amendment) addresses all issues, linking them to the goal of 100% literacy in America. It's a notion that nobody dared to dream!

The proposal comes at a time when an increasingly partisan America shows division not seen since 1861! Any concept offering constructive solutions in conjunction with unity measures should be studied. Furthermore, there is mounting evidence that billions of tax payer dollars can be saved with the adoption of this legislation. It comes down to Congressmen and Senators looking past the "toxic," stop protecting their jobs and start doing them!

We must remember that the President will not be involved in the amendment process. Passage in the House and Senate will send it back to the states. We will need 37 states for ratification.