New at Reason

|5.5.06 @ 2:46PM|#

Boy, you've got some fans there, you communist! Don't you know it's American to force everyone to speak English? Jeez!

|5.5.06 @ 2:48PM|#

Just wait until PETA takes notice of the leather jacket, then you'll really be criticized.

|5.5.06 @ 2:48PM|#

I've only read the first 10 or so emails but they fit the stereotype I had of people who would watch the O'Reilly Factor nearly exactly.

I guess Bill and his listeners alike can't come up with a more intelligent or pithy response than "shut up!"

VikingMoose|5.5.06 @ 2:50PM|#

wow. all the "liberal" and "pinko" remarks.

woah. all the hatred, too.

good job, Nick!

|5.5.06 @ 2:51PM|#

Ha ha! This is great stuff.

"I seen you on The Factor. If you think Spanish is so damn great, why don't you move to Mexico! My home town is over run with Mexicans and 99% are babbling in Spanish and spray painting every thing that don't move!"

Precious.

|5.5.06 @ 2:52PM|#

Funny thing is Nick is probably the most patriotic American O'Reilly has had on his show in ages. God forbid someone stands up for the constitution.

|5.5.06 @ 2:52PM|#

I so wish those intrepid defenders of our mother tongue would learn to write it correctly first. I stopped counting when I got to 30 capitalization errors.

If you can tell the quality of a man's character by his enemies, then Mr. Gillespie is a noble soul indeed.

|5.5.06 @ 2:53PM|#

Nick: Pretty strident of you, don't you think? Seems like you could have delivered the same message in much less inflammatory style. Can't be too surprised at the response, although it probably would have been the same regardless.

|5.5.06 @ 2:55PM|#

" If you do not like America leave. Jesus Will Rule With a Rod of Iron Like it OR Not,"

Yup. that sums it up for me.

|5.5.06 @ 2:57PM|#

Why can't conservatives understand the difference between "you're" and "your"? Oh, right.....they're idiots. I mean, their idiots. I thought Bill was very sympathetic to Nick's take on things. Or was he being sarcastic?

|5.5.06 @ 2:59PM|#

The response from the guy in Rathdrum, ID, reminds me why I don't miss living in Northern Idaho--and he was quite mild by community standards.

Timothy|5.5.06 @ 2:59PM|#

No I am not against any race but enough is enough. Mexico and Africa are both countries that are falling apart

Apparently Africa was unified while I wasn't looking, who's President of Africa these days anyway? Is it that Fox fellow?

|5.5.06 @ 3:01PM|#

Nick, you should be most insulted by the guy who called you John Stamos. Although, if it gets you in with Rebecca Romijn, it might be worth it...

|5.5.06 @ 3:28PM|#

Nick, your name on the masthead should read Nick "Fonz" Gillespie from now on.

|5.5.06 @ 3:28PM|#

Explain to me again, how the GOP is not in fact the party of racists?

Not that all Republicans are racist -- but all racists are republicans.

|5.5.06 @ 3:28PM|#

Nick, your name on the masthead should read Nick "Fonz" Gillespie from now on.

|5.5.06 @ 3:29PM|#

If this is posted a dozen times, I'm sorry. (Your servers suck!)

It looks from the transcript that it was a very brief thing. With more time, I'd like to have seen this statement addressed:

"In order to be a legal citizen in this country, it is the law that you have to know English to an eighth grade level."

Didn't the Senator mean, "to be a legal naturalized citizen"? If, by some twist of fate, I was raised in a cult that only spoke French, but was born and raised here in the U.S., would I not still be a citizen?

|5.5.06 @ 3:32PM|#

Illuminating. The O'Reilly Factor viewers are a bunch of illiterate, illogical, ultranationalist, racist dickwipes. Illuminating.
I ESPECIALLY ENJOY THE ALL-CAPS AND RUN-ON SENTENCES YOUR A FUCKING COMMIE LIB PINKO NICK GO BACK TO MEXICO WERE YOU BELONG FUCKER PROBABLY LIKE LITTLE KID'S TOO.

|5.5.06 @ 3:32PM|#

"You are rude and ill mannered and believe that by raising your voice and attempting to talk over others, you make your point."

but when Billy O' does it, then that's OK

|5.5.06 @ 3:33PM|#

Your day of reckoning with �TRUE� Americans is coming soon. You will have to answer for the years of stupidity and bias that you have thrown into the fan of life!!

I know this writer is probably just a slope-headed knuckledragger, but I can't help wondering if he knows something that I don't about what's coming.

|5.5.06 @ 3:51PM|#

Did real people write those O'Reilly comments? Surely not.

|5.5.06 @ 3:52PM|#

Illuminating. The O'Reilly Factor viewers are a bunch of illiterate, illogical, ultranationalist, racist dickwipes. Illuminating.
I ESPECIALLY ENJOY THE ALL-CAPS AND RUN-ON SENTENCES YOUR A FUCKING COMMIE LIB PINKO NICK GO BACK TO MEXICO WERE YOU BELONG FUCKER PROBABLY LIKE LITTLE KID'S TOO.

|5.5.06 @ 3:52PM|#

Firstly: feed the squirrels! They're weak from hunger!

I was just blown away by those comments. I may have to start agreeing with everything my liberal friends say about the ORF and it's fans. I didn't necessarily expect too many people to agree with Gillespie, but the whole "MEXICANS ARE DESTROYING AMERICA!" thing was unreal. God forbid these people should ever have to see or hear anyone who doesn't look exactly like them.

One thing no one else seems to have noticed: "On Tuesday, May 9, Reason Editor-in-Chief Nick Gillespie appeared..." Uh, today is May 5th. So either O'Reilly, Alexander, and Gillespie were WAY ahead of the pop-culture curve and are only releasing last year's transcripts now, or you've invented time travel.

|5.5.06 @ 3:53PM|#

I agree with the overwhelming sentiment of the folks that responded -- that jacket was totally lame.

|5.5.06 @ 3:53PM|#

Your day of reckoning with �TRUE� Americans is coming soon. You will have to answer for the years of stupidity and bias that you have thrown into the fan of life!!

The "fan of life"? Be a proto-fascist if you want, but please, use a less strained metaphor.

|5.5.06 @ 3:53PM|#

Jesus Will Rule With a Rod of Iron Like it OR Not,

Haha I'm totally using this as my signature line forevermore.

...And what's with the hating on black leather jackets? SRSLY. Is sleek fashion un-American? Apparently.

P.S. John Stamos and Rebecca Romijn are divorced.

|5.5.06 @ 3:58PM|#

I loved watching Lamar stutter and evade. Nick, kudos to you. I'm proud to be a Temple University School of Communications and Theater student today.

BTW, Hearing Nick Gillespie called a "liberal," "pinko," and "commie" really twisted the old melon. I wonder if Jefferson would be slammed as a "left-wing, Stalinist fruitcake" on The Factor.

|5.5.06 @ 4:00PM|#

I loved watching Lamar stutter and evade. Nick, kudos to you. I'm proud to be a Temple University School of Communications and Theater student today.

BTW, Hearing Nick Gillespie called a "liberal," "pinko," and "commie" really twisted the old melon. I wonder if Jefferson would be slammed as a "left-wing, Stalinist fruitcake" on The Factor.

|5.5.06 @ 4:06PM|#

There's even some more love out there.

Is it just me or do all of those comments read like they were written by Eric Cartman?

|5.5.06 @ 4:08PM|#

There's even some more love out there.

Is it just me or do all of those comments read like they were written by Eric Cartman?

|5.5.06 @ 4:12PM|#

Hey Nick, good job!

Congratulations on arousing the ire of know-nothings across the country. That happens whenever their delusions are challenged by someone who can actually think.

I've noticed in those e-mails and elsewhere that the level of outrage about immigrants and speaking English seem to correspond with the number of errors in spelling and grammar.

Tom

|5.5.06 @ 4:13PM|#

Wow, that John Stamos crack was hilarious. Can we see a pic of you in the jacket?

|5.5.06 @ 4:38PM|#

Link to pic of Nick and his ubiquitous (symbiotic, even) leather jacket.

|5.5.06 @ 4:38PM|#

When Fox News first came on the air, I would watch it because it provided a real alternative to the generally leftist slant of the other major networks. I also used to watch O'Reilly after he first came on because he would provide an alternative slant to commentary on current events.

I still visit the Fox News website sometimes, to get a differently biased choice of news stories to complement CNN and the rest, but I never tune in to O'Reilly anymore. He is a completely predictable on-the-air bully, so there isn't even any entertainment value in watching him at this point.

When I talk to my leftist friends about politics, they accuse me of being a 'conservative', and when I talk to my conservative friends they accuse me of being a 'leftist'. As a libertarian, this is really frustrating. People just seem to think about issues by classifying you as a member of a group, and then assuming you think like members of that goup are 'supposed' to think on every issue. It's the intellectual equivalent of racism.

I'll be really encouraged when people like Nick Gillespie get to moderate their own TV/NetTV/radio shows, so as to break the left/right conceptual duopoly that so dominates our national discourse.

I always get a little twinge of cringe when I hear some moderator or emcee say "And now, for THE opposing view...."

|5.5.06 @ 4:39PM|#

Why has no one yet parodied (IMHO) the best 'response' yet??? (and i'm not even done with them!) =

"I live in Redding, CT. and probably am smarter and wealthier than you. If you ever try to peddle that self hating american crap here in front of me, I will confront you. I will also add that I am better looking as well. I say this last thing because I know that it bothers you. Nice wussy leather jacket too!

I will also add that I *am* actually better looking than Nick, but dont think that puts in his debate weight-class.

And personally i dig the jacket. It's a trademark. I believe in finding a look you like and sticking with it. Even if Nick is clearly a graceless, ugly, sophomoric, rude and ill mannered, full of shit, absolute-FOOL shithead, self-hating white boy, communist sympathizer, liberal cry baby, arrogant ass, bizarro pig AND A TRAITOR. oh, and a jerk.

And I only learned that from the second 1/2 of the comments, when i started keeping track of the good ones.

wow. What kind of mail do *actual* liberals get?

I think you might have done better, nick, by just saying, 'its uncessary and its just grandstanding'. People get that. Mentioning Iraq instantly turned you into "TEH LIBRALS!"...regardless of what you'd intended.

JG

|5.5.06 @ 4:40PM|#

Why has no one yet parodied (IMHO) the best 'response' yet??? (and i'm not even done with them!) =

"I live in Redding, CT. and probably am smarter and wealthier than you. If you ever try to peddle that self hating american crap here in front of me, I will confront you. I will also add that I am better looking as well. I say this last thing because I know that it bothers you. Nice wussy leather jacket too!

I will also add that I *am* actually better looking than Nick, but dont think that puts me in his debate weight-class.

And personally i dig the jacket. It's a trademark. I believe in finding a look you like and sticking with it. Even if Nick is clearly a graceless, ugly, sophomoric, rude and ill mannered, full of shit, absolute-FOOL shithead, self-hating white boy, communist sympathizer, liberal cry baby, arrogant ass, bizarro pig AND A TRAITOR. oh, and a jerk.

And I only learned that from the second 1/2 of the comments, when i started keeping track of the good ones.

wow. What kind of mail do *actual* liberals get?

I think you might have done better, nick, by just saying, 'its uncessary and its just grandstanding'. People get that. Mentioning Iraq instantly turned you into "TEH LIBRALS!"...regardless of what you'd intended.

JG

|5.5.06 @ 4:41PM|#

Hey Nick, as a Libertarian I was quite disappointed with your interview on O'Reilly. You seemed more Anti-American than a rugged individual.

Nothing says rugged individualism like going along with the crowd.

Jesus Will Rule With a Rod of Iron Like it OR Not,

I'd give 20 to 1 odds that this guy thinks Jesus spoke English.

I have to admit, I love how much O'Reilly fans can infer about a person from their opinion on one "issue". All I got from that transcript was that Nick isn't concerned about whether or not immigrants speak or sing in English.

|5.5.06 @ 4:42PM|#

I haven't read the piece yet, but I look forward to it.

But a question: Has reason.com changed the font used in the article pages? Also, several of the comments to Nick appeared on my screen as white type on a white background. Or is it just my brower that has suddenly gone haywire?

|5.5.06 @ 4:45PM|#

How much money is needed to upgrade the server to an acceptable level? I think we could take up a collection or something.

|5.5.06 @ 4:45PM|#

Your day of reckoning with �TRUE� Americans is coming soon. You will have to answer for the years of stupidity and bias that you have thrown into the fan of life!! You certainly have smelled up my America with your crap!!!

I hope this day of reckoning comes soon. I guarantee I have more guns and can shoot them straighter than just about all of these troglodytes.

And Joseph, "fan of life" is a beautiful metaphor. I'm using it at least once a day from now on. Maybe I can combine it in a sentence with Joe Shit the Rag Man and A.J. Squared away...

|5.5.06 @ 4:46PM|#

In a "melting pot" country like ours with immigrants from dozens of languages and cultures, we'd have anarchy if every immigrant insisted on just using their native language.

You hear that? ANARCHY!! Mr. Gillespie clearly doesn't understand what he's advocating here.

|5.5.06 @ 4:48PM|#

Two comments:

1. I'm now convinced that half of America is below average and average is rather well represented in those e-mails.

2. I'm still trying to figure out how such troglodytes managed to operate a computer keyboard or a cell phone keypad in order to send e-mail.

|5.5.06 @ 4:49PM|#

ILLEGAL is not a sick bird, it means you shouldn't do it!

Now that's some funny shit right there, I don't care who you are.

|5.5.06 @ 4:50PM|#

May 9? It's not May 9 yet. Is the date incorrect or is it fiction?

I thought Mr. Gillesipie really was on with Senator Lamar! recently and this sounds about right.

It warms the heart to see Lamar! and O'Reilly getting along so well, though. Imagine an upstanding white Tennessean -- a Senator, no less! -- speaking respectfully to an Irish papist in O'Reilly's grandfather's day. Heavens!

|5.5.06 @ 4:50PM|#

The "fan of life" is ideal for blowing away the stench of death.

How much money is needed to upgrade the server to an acceptable level? I think we could take up a collection or something.

They are also servers who only sit and wait.

Warren|5.5.06 @ 4:52PM|#

FEED THE SQUIRRELS

I will also add that I am better looking as well. I say this last thing because I know that it bothers you. Nice wussy leather jacket too!

Save your breath BillyBob I've been telling him that for years.

Seriously Nick, what greater accolade could you receive, than the vitriol of O'Rednecks. You did us proud.

|5.5.06 @ 4:53PM|#

...(here's to hoping some server squirrels aren't chewing on earlier versions of this, ready to regurgitate it when least expected)...

Whoa!

Well I'd like to thank Nick for my first introduction to O'Reilly's show. It's so much worse than I'd even imagined.

It's a bit odd how sensitive people get over language...but something that never changes. I used to get similar emails on my long-defunct Ebonics site.

I think Nick should send a group response email stating,

Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to comprehend it fully. Please write me again when you have learned to write properly in English.

OK, I'm joking of course, but wow.

Feliz Cinco de Mayo!

|5.5.06 @ 4:54PM|#

Reason? What an oxymoron.

Just classic.

I do think that Nick ought to put up a representative cross-section of positive e-mails he received (surely there were some). Otherwise he's just unfairly trashing the O'Reilly Factor fanbase by showing these.

|5.5.06 @ 4:56PM|#

Stevo, I had the same phenomenon of disappearing email upon changing between windows, but when you scroll up and down, the emails' text reappears

Pro Libertate: there's a site on Amazon.com to collect donations for Hit and Run. someone linked to it once when I asked the same question as you

Garth|5.5.06 @ 4:56PM|#

My parents watch O'Reilly every night. They have done so for a very long time. My father participates in whatever boycott O'Reilly dreams up. My father used to exist within the sane depths of conservative America but has slid into a more virulent form (he openly states that we should nuke Iran). My mother was once a Democrat but I suspect she is becoming a wacko too.

I visited a couple of months ago. They urged me to sit and watch their regular evening schedule... Fox from dinner to ... well I don't know, I gave up at 10pm. I mentioned a bit about O'Reilly's more colourful antics (loofah anyone?) and how his lies, hyperbole and all the other sins have been well documented. The looks on their faces couldn't have been more twilight zone if I had sprouted a third eye or was speaking in tongues.

I think the show is a pernicious evil.

Mike|5.5.06 @ 4:59PM|#

Nick got off easy, they didn't once call him an ACLU member...O'Reilly's biggest insult.

|5.5.06 @ 5:00PM|#

Maybe someone already mentioned this, but... I dont see a problem with someone singing the National Anthem in another language, whats important is that immigrants understand and believe in the ideas (freedom, liberty, capitalism,...) that makes this country great. But what bothers me about the 'Spanish version' is that they changed the lyrics. I dont get why they did that. It makes it seem like theyre trying to create their own country within the country. I actually do find that offensive.

Mike|5.5.06 @ 5:04PM|#

I consider it a compliment for a recent immigrant to sing the start spangled banner in his/her own language. It's a good way of showing love for your new country, even if you haven't yet learned the language.

Would we rather have immigrants singing our national anthem in spanish and flying our flag, or singing their national anthem and burning ours?

Mike|5.5.06 @ 5:04PM|#

I consider it a compliment for a recent immigrant to sing the start spangled banner in his/her own language. It's a good way of showing love for your new country, even if you haven't yet learned the language.

Would we rather have immigrants singing our national anthem in spanish and flying our flag, or singing their national anthem and burning ours?

|5.5.06 @ 5:05PM|#

I find it offensive when people wear socks with sandals. I will be lobbying this weekend for a Senate resolution letting people know that the federal government looks down on that.

Wild Pegasus|5.5.06 @ 5:05PM|#

Two things really frightened me about this:

1. These people vote.
2. These people breed.

- Josh

|5.5.06 @ 5:13PM|#

biologist, that's too much work. I want something right here that I can click on. I want a target dollar figure. I want my donations to go to replacing the server, and to replacing the server alone. I want world peace under my benign, yet absolute, rule. Oh, wait, my mind started drifting a bit there.

|5.5.06 @ 5:13PM|#

But WP, therein lies the silver lining. As libertarians, we have the potential to breed more than they do.

|5.5.06 @ 5:14PM|#

What if we were to start singing the Mexican national anthem...in ENGLISH! Would that mess with some heads or what! Nobody would know what to think!

|5.5.06 @ 5:18PM|#

Follow-up to my last post - whoa, the Mexican national anthem is even more violent than ours:

War, war! Take the national pennants
and soak them in waves of blood.
...
Oh country, 'ere your children
defenseless bend their neck to the yoke,
may your fields be watered with blood,
may they trod upon blood.
And may your temples, palaces and towers
collapse with horrid clamor,
and their ruins live on to say:
This land belonged to a thousand heroes.

|5.5.06 @ 5:18PM|#

ILLEGAL is not a sick bird, it means you shouldn't do it!

the other Mark,

Ha ha! I didn't catch that one. If I ever saw a phrase that belongs on an "Engrish" t-shirt, this is certainly it.

Garth|5.5.06 @ 5:19PM|#

Zach,

How could the four or so Libertarian women possibly breed faster than the 100 million miscreants? Unless you assume:

1) Libertarianism is carried mostly by the sperm and uninfluenced by the egg or

2) Libertarianism is learned and Libertarian men only have to adopt in greater numbers that the miscreants adopt and breed

and

3) Enough women will actually agree to bear libertarian men's babies or

4) Adoption agencies will willingly overlook the adoptees libertarian tendencies

|5.5.06 @ 5:22PM|#

Garth,

You forgot

5.) The 4 libertarian women in existence are actually non-mammals who lay thousands upon thousands of fertilized would-be libertarian-hatchlings.

|5.5.06 @ 5:22PM|#

Going to agree with Ron. I agree with you but unless I am missing something from having only read the transcript and not having seen it on TV, you did a rather poor job of trying to convince people that you are correct

Timothy|5.5.06 @ 5:24PM|#

I find it offensive when people wear socks with sandals.

Stay out of the Pacific Northwest, then.

I can say this about Ol' Bill: at least the intern he sexually harassed was attractive.

|5.5.06 @ 5:25PM|#

5.) The 4 libertarian women in existence are actually non-mammals who lay thousands upon thousands of fertilized would-be libertarian-hatchlings.

Oh I so wish that were true! ROFL

Timothy|5.5.06 @ 5:27PM|#

Also, is it just me or does anybody else want to photoshop some ORLY? Photos of KATU2's wunderkind?

|5.5.06 @ 5:29PM|#

I, for one, would like the original lyrics returned the music of our National Anthem.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_011.html

|5.5.06 @ 5:33PM|#

If you ever try to peddle that self hating american crap here in front of me, I will confront you. I will also add that I am better looking as well. I say this last thing because I know that it bothers you.

Wow... this guy sounds just like Smoove B Love of Onion fame. To wit "I will have a handpicked team of florists cover your desk at work with a mixture of sensuous-smelling rose petals. They will also leave a note reading, "Girl, you are most fine. I will pick you up at 8." This will show you and your coworkers that Smoove is the man for you, as well as give you a glimpse into the personal attention I will lavish on you later that evening."

|5.5.06 @ 5:35PM|#

Mediageek,
thanks for posting the link of Nick in his leather. Now can we get one of him scratching his armpit?

|5.5.06 @ 5:35PM|#

There were also a few respectfully disagrees in there that were actually respectful. Heck, there were even a few agrees. Some were nicely worded.

There was one that was well-written and thoughtful...in all-caps. That blows my mind.

I was also sad to see such a sound-byte debate - the length was so short it couldn't help but be so.

Unfortunately I only read the transcript, but it seemed that the Senator received more time, as well as getting leading questions from O'Reilly. Ah well, that's probably the result of the time crunch.

|5.5.06 @ 5:56PM|#

Yeah, the good-looking wussy jacket guy was funny and I love the "illegal bird" soundbite...

Media, thanks for posting the pic.

|5.5.06 @ 6:04PM|#

"I'd give 20 to 1 odds that this guy thinks Jesus spoke English."

Once upon a time, I was sitting in the waiting room of a doctor's office. The nurse enters the room to call for the next patient to come see the doctor.
She looks down at the chart. Looks up, scans the room, looks back down, gets a kind of consternated look on her face, looks back up, and in a questioning tone says "Gee-sus?"

A hispanic-looking fellow gets up from his chair in the back of the room, and goes with the nurse to see the doctor.

So, if I may be, for a moment, judgemental, I would say that Jesus probably speaks fluent Spanish.

|5.5.06 @ 6:04PM|#

After reading these enlightened comments, I'm convinced more than ever that the Electoral College is a godsend.

|5.5.06 @ 6:06PM|#

BTW: Great job, Nick; wear the scorn of The Great Booboisie like the badge of honor it is...

|5.5.06 @ 6:12PM|#

My father used to exist within the sane depths of conservative America but has slid into a more virulent form (he openly states that we should nuke Iran).

It's always been my belief that the collective sanity of American conservatives had been going downhill since 1992 when that "draft-dodging, dope-smoking, adulter" Clinton became president and started to corode their precious "American values." Then 9-11 happened. That put them over the edge into complete and total insanity.

|5.5.06 @ 6:14PM|#

Nick and Mike Fumento have a few things to talk about. I visit Fumento's hate mail site occasionally, for which I still have Suck to thank.

One can only hope these are the very same people who wrote Nick (would cut down on the total).

http://www.fumento.com/hatemail.html

http://www.suck.com/daily/2000/01/06/daily.html

|5.5.06 @ 6:18PM|#

It appears that Nick tore the senator a new asshole right out of the gate. I have no idea whether that was a good debate strategy or not. On the one hand, it appears to have alienated a good many viewers rather than persuaded them. On the other hand, were those viewers persuadable in the first place? Also, it let Nick seize the initiative and inject several actual facts into the debate, while Alexander could only repeat that unity is more important than diversity.

"Sir, I think that you liberals are so far out of it, that if left to you sickos, you would sell our country to the highest bidder."

I think this guy actually gets it. He's one of the few respondents who understand what we are -- we're free-market liberals. ;)

|5.5.06 @ 6:21PM|#

Oh. My. God.

I thought this was a joke at first. But I'm happy to be the first to remark:

"I'm proud to be an Okie from Muskogee."

|5.5.06 @ 6:22PM|#

Good job, Nick. I wish I could have caught the show. I guarantee you my parents did.

|5.5.06 @ 6:35PM|#

"I think this guy actually gets it. He's one of the few respondents who understand what we are -- we're free-market liberals. ;)"

Dang ol' blind pig there found itself an acorn.

|5.5.06 @ 6:39PM|#

Nick,

I only read the transcript--didn't see the actual broadcast. While I share your sense of outrage, I think you could have delivered a stronger message without the sarcasm.

As for the responses...I especially liked the one from the guy who said he was better looking than you. That'll teach you!

|5.5.06 @ 6:39PM|#

Dear god, if I hear one more guy named O'Hurly, Schmidt, Santuci, Anderson, Van der Ludt, Wysocki or McWhatever denounce immigration or anyone who thinks it *might* have positive effects, I'm going to fscking hurt someone.

Odds are it will be someone with a European name....

|5.5.06 @ 6:40PM|#

Oh, also...FEED THE SQUIRRELS! It was impossible to post for a few hours.

|5.5.06 @ 6:41PM|#

My wife is a libertarian (and an economics major). The main thing keeping us from producing numerous offspring (which we would raise to be libertarians) is lack of funds. Anyone who would like to contribute to our Create New Libertarians Fund may send me an e-mail for an address to which you may send your donations.

|5.5.06 @ 6:58PM|#

Lucky bastard.

My wife is anything but libertarian. We've agreed to not discuss politcs...mostly.

I'm still gonna convert the kids on the side. What the missus don't know won't hurt me.

|5.5.06 @ 7:14PM|#

I like to read H&R, you guys crack my shit up. I don't usually post, as I don't like to oppose my opinion on others, but I am forced to. How could you guys have missed this one?

"My forefathers came here in 1728. They had to register and become CITIZENS LEGALLY."

Not only did his forefathers become U.S. citizens before there even was a U.S., but they registered and everything. We must now all bow at the feet of the descendant of the origianl Americans.

--Nick

|5.5.06 @ 7:21PM|#

You know, if it weren't for Reason, I would be able to just forget that Fox News exists. But every now and then, you bastards remind me and I have to get all upset about how fucking STUPID people are. Now I'm worried that I'll have to talk about this shit when I'm a teaching assistant for a freshman composition class next year...

|5.5.06 @ 7:22PM|#

Enough women will actually agree to bear libertarian men's babies or

Well, given masculine libertoid fascination with SciFi comic books or whatever the hell Brian Doherty is going on about today, that is unlikely to happen while we half-dozen liberettes are still fertile. Unless you are as good-looking as Nick, that is.

Anyway, thanks to Nick for taking it to them!

|5.5.06 @ 7:29PM|#

"Nice wussy leather jacket too!"

"LIBERALS SUCK, JUST ASK MONICA,"

"The changing of the words to be sung in Spanish by these invaders are making fun of the American Citizen only you are to stupid to see it."

Notice that there is absolutely no "there" to any of these arguments that these batty protocephalapods have convinced themselves they're making.

Reflexive nationalistic pride regurgitation is not an adequate substitute for critical thinking!

Here's one, absolutely inscrutable, and deep-fried buggy as well:

"I have watched people like me go from - well, they are getting a lot of social advantages - medical care, school attendance, etc. - but it could be worse. And now it is worse! when they start demanding those privileges and changing our national anthem, they have lost any sympathy that I might have had for them."

What the fuck?

|5.5.06 @ 7:31PM|#

I think The Real Bill is on to something there. We aren't revelling in market success, but my wife's another H&R lurker and we plan to bear and raise some young libertarians. All we need now is a patron...

|5.5.06 @ 7:42PM|#

temporary k,

Just imagine if Bill Gates were a libertarian...

Where are all the libertarian patrons?

|5.5.06 @ 7:51PM|#

>Unless you are as good-looking as Nick, that is.

Tell it like it is, sistah!

Tim Mathews|5.5.06 @ 7:56PM|#

I disagree with most of the negative comments regarding Gillespie, but I do think that his appearance was pretty sophomoric. Air time is precious in television and he filled most of that time with sarcasm, insults, and minimal substance. There was very little of value in what he said. That's not to say that Lamar Alexander came off as a modern Aristotle, but at least he could string together a coherent thought without sounding like a hyperactive college activist.

|5.5.06 @ 8:14PM|#

You want reasoned debate and substance on a two minute blurb on the O'Reily Factor? You're nuts.

Coming out sarcastically and laying down the few facts presented was the best way to handle it.

I would have loved to see the look on the senator's face after that opening line.

Priceless.

|5.5.06 @ 8:21PM|#

"Well, given masculine libertoid fascination with SciFi comic books or whatever the hell Brian Doherty is going on about today, that is unlikely to happen while we half-dozen liberettes are still fertile. Unless you are as good-looking as Nick, that is."

You've probably seen what I look like on *ahem* that other site. Whether I'm better looking than Nick is really a matter of opinion...

|5.5.06 @ 8:22PM|#

"Just imagine if Bill Gates were a libertarian..."

I'd say that somebody needs to loan him a copy of Atlas Shrugged, but judging by Microsoft's latest products I'd say he's probably in the midst of pulling a Dagny.

|5.5.06 @ 8:38PM|#

Tim M,
I would normally agree with your sentiments, but not in this case. Any non-binding resolution, especially one dealing with what languages can be used for what types of speech, deserves the exact amount of serious discussion Nick gave it--none. Flippant sarcasm was entirely appropriate for this particular discussion.

My favorite quote from all the letters had to be this one:

"Mexicans don't want to be Americans they just want to live here and have American lifestyles.."

|5.5.06 @ 8:51PM|#

Wow- some people are just big F-in idiots.

But, should I still be amazed at this after knowing for many years that a lot of people are just f-ing insane? I always hoped it were closer to Wow- some people are just big F-in idiots.

But, should I still be amazed at this after knowing for many years that a lot of people are just f-ing insane? I always hoped it were closer to 50% and not 90-99% of the people that are just well, words fail me.

And surely I can't be the only one who just Does Not "Get" this whole "Certain things can onl be said in a certain language"'thing? I mean I know some words only exist in some languages and some things don't translate, but excepting that, can't anyone just about say anything in any language as long as they CAN? And WTF does it matter?

I mean I am a "natural born" citizen and frankly if I want to I will sing the National Anthem in Spanish, French, Russian, Brooklyn, New Joisean, Texan and Dutch and then sh!t on the American flag and p!ss on my George Bush Campaign picture while watching midget anul ponr.

|5.5.06 @ 8:54PM|#

jd jackson,

Fear not! You have found refuge with non-crazies! And don't let an unscientific, self-selected sample of crazies convince you that it's more than 50%. :-)

That was my first reaction too. Not to worry. Remember, these are Bill O'Reilly fans, and fanatic enough to take the time to write to Nick. Not representative of anything!

|5.5.06 @ 9:10PM|#

True, I hope so. Sometimes I find it hard to stay sane in this world with all the crazies and true "anti-Americans" who think we are "anti-american communists when they ahve no appreciation for what (to me at least) America is all about. But if anything it can get very funny reading this sh!t, especially coming from O'Reilly's audience.

For example "After watching your performance on the O'Reillly Factor last night I can only conclude that

a.) You are rude and ill mannered and believe that by raising your voice and attempting to talk over others, you make your point."

Isn't that what Oreilly is ALL about?

Also I admit I am a little bit ignorant about immigration in the Old days, but did someone really have to apply for citizenship and take an English test in 1728, before the US was even a country? A lot of the stuff people say I just don't know what to say. I think I traced my ancestors back to 600 B.C. and godummit they learned American English just like anyone else.

|5.5.06 @ 9:17PM|#

jd,

May I call you jd? :-)

Yeah, that guy cracked me up! (Almost) anyone can trace their ancestors to 1728...because the people who came here then would have, by now, been interbred with enough people currently living here, including much more recent immigrants, that it's pointless!

I could add that the English they learned then is much different than ours...

I could add that American English (as all English) is a creole...

I could add that Spanglish is not necessarily a bad thing...

but, I could also add it aint' going to happen because everyone on this planet who wants to make something of themselves is learning English, and it's likely the only lingua franca we'll have in the coming few centuries...

but, well, you know...these are people who think it's a GOOD thing that their ancestors abandoned their home languages and refused to let their kids even learn it.

|5.5.06 @ 9:24PM|#

Missed that show, but I got to watch how O'Reilly proudly announced that they are the most trusted TV news show, since a whopping 11% of the people prefer them...

Now, maybe my math is a bit rusty, but doesn't 11% means that 89% do not prefer them at all?

|5.5.06 @ 9:37PM|#

Well, it's higher than the % who want to play with his Falfel Loofah

|5.5.06 @ 9:42PM|#

Intrigued am I at the percent of nutjobs out there who called Nick "left-wing."
May they all come to have a serious case of bird flu.

Gladly would I wash Nick's tootsies, yet my first vote was for Goldwater.

There is a disconnect here.

strat|5.5.06 @ 9:51PM|#

5.) The 4 libertarian women in existence are actually non-mammals who lay thousands upon thousands of fertilized would-be libertarian-hatchlings.

Wow..Libertarians are Goa'uld! Time to find the Stargate and start infesting!

(I'm looking forward to wearing those sexy proto-Egyptian threads, too.)

|5.5.06 @ 10:19PM|#

I am rather disappointed that this thread failed to draw any of the walking lobotomies who mailed in. It would be a huge ego booster to throw some pearls to the swine.

|5.5.06 @ 10:42PM|#

"I seen you on the factor."

Ahhh, it's great to see the ignorant ones come out of the woodwork, eh? I'd love to see what would have happened if someone had posted the e-mails for some of those guys.

|5.5.06 @ 10:43PM|#

Man, that was completely high-larious, I read each and every e-mail. My personal favorite of all the charges against Gillespie is -

"You certainly have smelled up my America with your crap!!! And to think you have the audacity to have a doctorate in English!!"

LOLOLOLLOL !

|5.5.06 @ 10:45PM|#

Also, I love these "small government" conservatives, who are insisting on a government enforced offical language calling Gillespie a communist and anti-american. Has everyone forgotten the Soviets' mandatory Russification programs in the SSRs?

|5.5.06 @ 10:49PM|#

"I am a Baptist preacher and many think that Jesus was a tolerate [sic] LORD and that is deadly [sic] wrong. Jesus loves us all but He hates sin and does not tolerate sin at all and we should not either."

Waiiiit...so speaking Spanish is a sin?

QUICK, TELL THE GRAND INQUISITOR!

|5.5.06 @ 11:47PM|#

everyone on this planet who wants to make something of themselves is learning English, and it's likely the only lingua franca we'll have in the coming few centuries...

English as the lingua franca . . . sacre bleu!

|5.6.06 @ 12:06AM|#

Things I like about Nick Gillespie,

#329 He is our smug and arrogant jerk

|5.6.06 @ 12:09AM|#

Perhaps when O'Reilly reminds his listeners to keep their comments pithy, they think he is thpeaking with a lithp.

|5.6.06 @ 12:29AM|#

I never dreamed that Bill O'Reilly's show could be worth watching. But you made it happen.

Bravo, Nick!

|5.6.06 @ 12:37AM|#

What if we were to start singing the Mexican national anthem...in ENGLISH! Would that mess with some heads or what! Nobody would know what to think!

I think the English lyrics go like this:

Oh Americans dance on a dance floor.
And the Spaniards, they dance on a table.
And the Russians, they dance on a saber.
But the Mexicans dance on their hats!

Oh they dance on hot coals in Calcutta.
In Wisconsin they dance on fresh buttah,
Which they squeeze from one cow or an-uddah.
Yes, the Mexicans dance on their hats!
(Ole!)

There are Mexicans dancing on derbies.
There are Mexicans dancing on caps.
They just throw their fedoras
Wherever the floor is,
And start doing horas and taps!

... So take care! So beware!
Or they'll put castanets on
And ruin your Stetson,
'Cause they all think that they're Fred Astaire!

If you're ever in Mexico proper,
And you're wearing a straw hat or topper,
When the band starts to play, call a copper.
'Cause by now you should know
That they'll grab your chapeau,
And they'll stomp till it's flat
And that's that!
That's what Mexicans do on your hat.
(Ole!)

(Credit: "Mexican Hat Dance" by Allan Sherman)

|5.6.06 @ 12:40AM|#

The emails were quite enlightening. If the level of profanity wasn't quite so high, I might consider using them in my 4th grade English lessons. Rarely have I seen a concentration of writing that so thoroughly ignores the rules and spelling of the "common" language of our nation.

While I, too, would like to see immigrants and potential citizens become proficient in the English language, I am even more certain that many of my fellow citizens should do likewise.

|5.6.06 @ 12:52AM|#

English, the language of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, is actually my second language. As a kid in small town America, I grew up speaking pig latin, the true American language. I insist we sing the Anthem in our true native tongue; the rest of you can sod off to Limeyland if you don't like it.

|5.6.06 @ 1:20AM|#

Michael
Is it just me or do all of those comments read like they were written by Eric Cartman?

Hillarious! Try re-reading them all in his voice! It adds a whole new dimension. I looked, sadly unsuccesfully, for a Cartman-voiced Text-to-Voice program. I guess it was not meant to be. Or maybe it is being covered up by communist pinko leather-jacketeers.

|5.6.06 @ 1:30AM|#

Yeah, yeah, the pathetic comments from the O'Reilly show indicate that we really should find/make a better place to live, BUT... the cliche black jacket is a pretty weak trademark. Lose it, or just plain lose.

Sandy|5.6.06 @ 1:33AM|#

Jesus Will Rule With a Rod of Iron Like it OR Not,

So...Jesus is a well-hung gay S&M porn star? Well, that certainly explains a lot.

b-psycho|5.6.06 @ 1:55AM|#

LMMFAO!!!

|5.6.06 @ 3:51AM|#

Look, if English was good enough for Jesus, it should be good enough for all these pinkos trying to smear the Anthem by singing it in a false tongue.

|5.6.06 @ 3:58AM|#

I make a motion that the Anthem be sung only in an East Coast,19th century, American accent. Dern yer dern skin, Lamar, ain't the original accent of our forebears good enuf fer ya.

|5.6.06 @ 5:54AM|#

You never know, it might be fun to be that stupid. Let me try:

NICK GILESPEE IN MY OPION YOUR A DIRTY DAMN LETHER FAG YOU LOVE IT SO MUCH WHY DONT YOU GO BACK TO MWXICO YOU DAMN IRISH WOP YOURE MAGAZIONE IS REASON SHULD BE TREASON WE NEED REAL AMERICANS WHO SPEEK ENGLOISH LIKE GEORGE BUSH GO HOME COMMIE

Hmm. Not really fun, but it is nice not to have to think or worry about spelling errors.

|5.6.06 @ 8:59AM|#

Hey, I'm a pregnant libertarian woman. I'm Doing My Part! Though the "laying thousands of fertilized eggs" thing sounds more appealing, frankly. Especially if I get to lie on the beach with a margarita instead of watching them hatch.

You will have to answer for the years of stupidity and bias that you have thrown into the fan of life!!

What the hell does that even mean? Answer to whom? And will this mysterious entity have a problem with the leather jacket?

Anyway, it must be both important and true, because it warrants two exclamation marks.

|5.6.06 @ 9:29AM|#

From an email to Nick: As an American, I am fed up with your bleeding-heart, leftist, communist view-point and I�m fed up with it shoved in my face!!!!!

I'm sorry, but I laughed until tears ran down my face. NOBODY on the planet despises yesteryear's Communists more than I do - I have an absolute obsession with how depraved they were -- and I totally agree with Nick. Hence, I must actually be a a bleeding-heart, leftist communist.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

|5.6.06 @ 9:37AM|#

After watching your performance on the O'Reillly Factor last night I can only conclude that a.) You are rude and ill mannered and believe that by raising your voice and attempting to talk over others, you make your point.

Damn you, Gillespie, for sullying the reputation for calm and reasoned debate that The O'Reilly Factor worked so hard to achieve.

Libertarian communists piss me right the fuck off.

Warren|5.6.06 @ 9:58AM|#

Sally,
There's no beach, but the margarita can be arranged. You need only to mate once with one of our strongest males (a sacrifice few are willing to make, lie back and think of New Hampshire). We will build a fortress around you. You will be kept in the royal chamber located at its innermost depth. Nothing from the outside world will be allowed to reach you. Swarms of servants will tend your every need as you live out your days in darkness laying the precious eggs, and� You Will Be Our Queen.

|5.6.06 @ 10:43AM|#

If my own experiences are typical, the emails were only the first wave.

A series of poorly composed, illegibly scrawled letters are now crossing the country to you. Please share the best! You'll undoubtedly be sent little religious pamphlets (smelling of old people) and invariably many are sent without stamps yet get delivered because there is no return address.

I'd be opening my mail with salad tongs the next few weeks. good luck!

|5.6.06 @ 11:32AM|#

Damn it. Jamie Kelly beat me to the phony hate post. Man, I'm slow.

|5.6.06 @ 12:27PM|#

"invariably many are sent without stamps yet get delivered because there is no return address."

I've always wondered if that would work.

|5.6.06 @ 12:27PM|#

hilarious. absolutely hilarious. this transcript, comments and blog entry together constituted the longest, heartiest laugh i've had in recent memory. thanks!

'Jesus Will Rule With a Rod of Iron Like it OR Not,'

that was definitely my favorite.

|5.6.06 @ 12:28PM|#

The Bill, Pat Buchanan, and their ilk fear that the dominant Anglican culture in America will eventually be replaced by an Hispanic one. And/or that the melting pot will become the salad bowl. It's either "them people is gonna take over" or "oh no, we'll have anarchy." This wimpy fear and conservatism is decidely unamerican. What would Davy Crockett think? "Oh, I won't go off on my own to explore the wilderness, something bad might happen.?" Did the pioneers think, "Oh, we won't go find a new land, start fresh in a place unknown, cut-off from the rest of civilization. This would be anarchy?" When did this fear of "anarchy" set in in America? Who started it? I want names. As Hayek points out in "The Fatal Conceit" all the great civilizations made the most advances when they were in "anarchic" stages. They started falling apart once centralization took over. Unwittingly, this is the direction where Alexander, David Brooks, and the neocons want us to go.

The idea of America, as I understand it, is that America is a dynamic place where social experimentation is legally allowed to happen, where new people are allowed onto our shores, new ideas are invited in, as long as no one is forcing his views onto another. Most of the framers had this view, as did their ancestors - people like Roger Williams. What the fans of the Bill express is a rejection of the worldview of the Framers. This other conservative, old world viewpoint is what many early and contempory immigrants were and are seeking to escape - a viewpoint that could be stated like this: "this is our land, our culture, our tribe, and if you want to stay you must be forced to conform....or go back to where you came from. But even if you do go back, we will seek you out and the ideas we don't like, hunt you down and kill you unless you become a part of our empire." So, to the Bill, Lamar Alexander, and their fans I say this, if you really don't like the idea of America, then why don't *you* go back to where your ancestors came from. Of course you can stay and spout all the nonsense that you want. This is America afterall. But don't try to pass your nonsense into law.

|5.6.06 @ 12:36PM|#

Nick,

I think the vitriolic email you received is a good sign actually. The first step to opening a closed mind is to point out there is an opposing viewpoint.

Maybe next time they will try to come up with a cogent counter-argument and actually be forced to think.

Or not.

I also am hopeful, perhaps naively so, that there is a silent minority that actually decided to take a peak and see what this Reason is all about

dhex|5.6.06 @ 1:20PM|#

i'm hoping for a nice, fat spread of letters in the next issue of reason from these folks.

at the same time, i feel kinda bad cause there really is a segment of our population as stupid as the jersey mc chimpler s. haliburton, esq. of the world make them out to be.

|5.6.06 @ 2:43PM|#

I didn't get a chance to read the responses in their entirety, but I did a search for "subscribe" and "subscription" just to see if anybody threatened to cancel. No such responses turned up.

Good job at untying the Gordian knot, Nick: You alienated the lunatic fringe without losing a single subscriber!

;)

|5.6.06 @ 3:14PM|#

The selected emails are pretty bad, but so was the interview. At least Lamar! stuck to the point and seemed coherent; Nick! was snarky, dishonest through exaggeration*, and rather embarassing; about on par with the emails, I do believe. "He still sang opera," indeed.
*("And now you're trying to say that only way can you be truly American is to say it in English" - Nope. I actually read the bill under discussion.)

This wimpy fear and conservatism is decidely unamerican. What would Davy Crockett think?

You mean that guy who died fighting with Mexico over who owned Texas? If anything he sounds more like of o' them thar Evil Racist(TM) Minutemen.

What the fans of the Bill express is a rejection of the worldview of the Framers.

Oh, really? Guess who wrote this:
They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their number, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass. If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship: but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements.

Perhaps ogivemeahome should be called ogivemeahistorylesson. You guys crack me up.

Warren|5.6.06 @ 3:33PM|#

Good job at untying the Gordian knot, Nick: You alienated the lunatic fringe without losing a single subscriber!

Whahuh? I thought we were the lunitic fringe.

Michael Geary|5.6.06 @ 3:38PM|#

Mr. F. is right. I agree with Nick on the issue, but he came across very poorly in the interview. I was about ready to start agreeing with Lamar, no matter how wrong he was, just because he behaved like a gentleman.

Where is Harry Browne when we need him?

|5.6.06 @ 3:56PM|#

I tend to agree with Nick, but was that email list really a "representative sampling"?

>> "Explain to me again, how the GOP is not in fact the party of racists? Not that all Republicans are racist -- but all racists are republicans."

Here in the Detroit area, the most xenophobic, anti-anyone-different people happen to be the automotive assembly line unionists (who heavily vote Democratic).

|5.6.06 @ 4:01PM|#

Lemur missed the point, which was that this notion that individuals and small communities should not be allowed to seek out their own paths, experiments, and amusements without the central government intruding is a conservatism that betrays the idea of America - a government founded on the idea that Americans should have the freedom to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. A bill seeking to restrain some Americans from various specific forms of this pursuit, however trivial (singing the national anthem in their own language) is anti-American.

|5.6.06 @ 4:02PM|#

You mean that guy who died fighting with Mexico over who owned Texas? If anything he sounds more like of o' them thar Evil Racist(TM) Minutemen.

There were several hundred Tejanos who fought and died alongside Crockett at the Alamo.

Because Texas wasn't a part of America yet, I guess we can forgive them for having primarily spoken Spanish.

Geary,
If demagoguery counts as "behaving" then yeah, I guess Lamar! was a gentleman. I'll take sarcastic over pandering douchebaggery anyday.
Of course, I'm one of those people who, as Lamar! would have you believe, want America to be like Iraq or Jerusalem, so you can take that with as many grains of salt as you wish.

|5.6.06 @ 4:06PM|#

Very well said, McCann.

RSDavis|5.6.06 @ 4:13PM|#

I have this same thing happen to me all the time. I like to post on political debate forums, and it seems like depending on the issue, I'm a crazy right winger or an America-hating stalinist.

What's up with that? People extrapolate an entire point-of-view for you based on their own preconcieved notions. They want to put you in a little box and label you.

Douchebags.

- R

|5.6.06 @ 4:19PM|#

I'm all for any new immigrants using whatever spoken tongue any way and anywhere they see fit. It's their path, their choice, and to force their behavior seems counterproductive.

That said, any immigrant (legal or otherwise) that doesn't attempt to learn English should realize that he/she shouldn't expect to have the same level of college and job opportunities as those who do. It's just the way it is, and if one chooses to go 'Spanish-Only', then there should be no complaining when options are greatly limited.

I couldn't imagine moving to a foreign country without immediately trying to develop at least a conversational skill of the local language. Doing so would simply make life a whole lot easier.

RSDavis... I agree. Most times, we're either painted as a Red Stater redneck or Blue Stater 'librul' because people are too lazy to understand where others are coming from on an issue-by-issue basis.

|5.6.06 @ 4:28PM|#

"I was about ready to start agreeing with Lamar, no matter how wrong he was, just because he behaved like a gentleman."

Now behaving like a gentleman has merit. And I wish there were more socio-politico talk shows on television that featured thoughtful and gentlemanly behavior. But really Geary, would you be ready to start agreeing with Hitler, Stalin, or Mao if they behaved like gentlemen?

Tim Mathews|5.6.06 @ 5:24PM|#

bago wrote, "You want reasoned debate and substance on a two minute blurb on the O'Reily Factor? You're nuts."

I agree that this is a tall order for the O'Reilly Factor, but this issue was simple enough for Gillespie to do it in less than a minute.

dogzilla wrote: "Any non-binding resolution, especially one dealing with what languages can be used for what types of speech, deserves the exact amount of serious discussion Nick gave it--none. Flippant sarcasm was entirely appropriate for this particular discussion."

bago wrote: "Coming out sarcastically and laying down the few facts presented was the best way to handle it."

To please the like-minded crowd here at Reason, sarcasm was sufficient. But if the intent was to influence the debate (and what other purpose could there have been?), then Gillespie should have tried some maturity and reason (no pun intended). It doesn't take more than 30 seconds to say, "This is part of a bigger issue regarding our national identity. Gov't funded bilingual education and bilingual government services are unnecessary expenditures that help to undercut our national identity by creating a more multicultural society rather than helping immigrants to assimilate. A non-binding resolution regarding what language a song will be sung in fails to address those issues. It is simply a politically expedient ride on a wave of public opinion without the burden of actually doing anything."

|5.6.06 @ 5:53PM|#

I don't care if people sing the National Anthem in Spanish, Esperanto, or Klingon. I favor opening the borders and letting a thousand cultural flowers bloom. I think there's a 'me-first-itis' and 'fear of the other' theme underscoring this resolution. It's an example of reactionary right wingers run amok. Yet, the "multiculturalism" of the Left is also a reactionary movement. As I said, I favor diversity and letting all cultures enjoy the full fruits of freedom to express themselves in any way they see fit. But while I think there should be no resolution on the Anthem, and no special legal restrictions for any cultural group, there should not be any political agenda being pushed from the other side, determining which cultural views should be preserved or shunned. In theory, multiculturism says that all cultures are equal; in practice the views of dead white Europeans, including the founders, are dismissed or given short shrift in favor of more popular sentiments, some of them romantically statist. So, all cultures are to be celebrated, just as long as they don't include 'dead white males' or Christians or capitalism. The multicultural view of culture is actually quite conservative as well, as it views culture as unchanging symbols, tools, and habits of a people. Innovation or learning from people of other cultures is considered to be "cultural imperialism" no matter that this is the way learning has occurred throughout history - one group learning and borrowing the cultural tools of another group, then tweaking those tools to suit their own environments. This would be fine if multiculturalism were simply an idea, voluntarily chosen. But it's pushed in the schools, and pushed in the legislatures. Congress has no business voting on resolutions over how the Anthem should be sung. Just as the schools, our courts, or legislatures, should have no business deciding the direction that "culture" should develop or which cultural element wins or loses.
At the same time, at the very least, all citizens, new immigrants and old ones descended from older immigrants, should have a better access and education about the basic political system in the country. How many children are given a thorough exposure to the Constitution and the rationale behind it before graduating from school?

James Anderson Merritt|5.6.06 @ 6:41PM|#

Lexism says, "I don't care if people sing the National Anthem in ... Esperanto..."

OK, I'll start. The rest of you can finish:

Ho, diru! Cxu vidas vi
Per frua, tagigxa lumo
Tion, kion ni salutis
Hieraux je noktigxo?

|5.6.06 @ 7:00PM|#

The comments Nick received demonstrate what a really bad idea democracy is. Those people get to vote on how we are allowed to live our lives. A frightening thought.

|5.6.06 @ 8:17PM|#

"at the same time, i feel kinda bad cause there really is a segment of our population as stupid as the jersey mc chimpler s. haliburton, esq. of the world make them out to be."

Quite frankly, I find it truly shocking that a person who's more virulently partisan and dumber than joisey can breathe on their own, let alone operate a computer.

James Anderson Merritt|5.6.06 @ 8:23PM|#

Lexism asks, "How many children are given a thorough exposure to the Constitution and the rationale behind it before graduating from school?"

Sadly, here in California, all too few. That wasn't the case when I was going to elementary school in California. We all had to study the Constitution in the 8th Grade and pass a fairly comprehensive test in order to satisfy the requirement.

Apparently, that curriculum requirement fell by the wayside some years ago. I was speaking with co-workers recently: both had attended California public schools in city school districts, but years after I did. The one who was closer in age to me remembered "some" coverage in history class, but no comprehensive, separate class. The one younger than both of us didn't recall any study of the Constitution whatsoever.

I am proud to say that the private 6-12 school where my wife works as an administrator and teacher does make a big deal about teaching civics and the constitution. She may even end up teaching a "local" civics class, to complement existing US Civics instruction, in the near future. (I'm crossing my fingers!)

|5.6.06 @ 11:12PM|#

"I was about ready to start agreeing with Lamar, no matter how wrong he was, just because he behaved like a gentleman."

I prefer a shove-it-up-their-ass-sideways guy on our side like Nick to a pretend gentleman like "Lamar". Gentlemenly-ness is getting us nowhere.

|5.7.06 @ 12:07AM|#

Obviously Nick went into the debate fully schooled regarding the necessary debating style for O'Reilly's format: get in as many zingers as you can in two minutes and forty three seconds and attempt to prevent your opponent from doing the same.

|5.7.06 @ 12:47AM|#

I'm not xenophobic. I just don't like foreigners.

|5.7.06 @ 1:09AM|#

Underlying this debate is an irrational xenophobia conflated with a rational (at least on the part of the few rational) fear that as the years march on, fewer and fewer of our citizens will get a thorough exposure to the doctrines our government was founded on and the historical reasons behind them. We would have no reason to fear an influx of new foreigners if this influx was not accompanied by an agenda to replace the teaching of liberal principles of limited government, capitalism, and the open society, with the reactionary doctrines of cultural relativism, state worship, anti-choice, anti-trade, and rationalizations for restrictions on speech (hate speech laws, etc.). Of course, at this time in our history our freedoms are more at threat from the Right than the Left. But the agenda of the Left, to take down liberalism in their own way, is nothing to sneeze at either. The only mistake is to put the blame on foreigners instead of where it belongs - on the heads of reactionary elements, Left and Right.

|5.7.06 @ 1:11AM|#

Underlying this debate is an irrational xenophobia conflated with a rational (at least on the part of the few rational) fear that as the years march on, fewer and fewer of our citizens will get a thorough exposure to the doctrines our government was founded on and the historical reasons behind them. We would have no reason to fear an influx of new foreigners if this influx was not accompanied by an agenda to replace the teaching of liberal principles of limited government, capitalism, and the open society, with the reactionary doctrines of cultural relativism, state worship, anti-choice, anti-trade, and rationalizations for restrictions on speech (hate speech laws, etc.). Of course, at this time in our history our freedoms are more at threat from the Right than the Left. But the agenda of the Left, to take down liberalism in their own way, is nothing to sneeze at either. The only mistake is to put the blame on foreigners instead of where it belongs - on the heads of reactionary elements, Left and Right.

|5.7.06 @ 1:11AM|#

Underlying this debate is an irrational xenophobia conflated with a rational (at least on the part of the few rational) fear that as the years march on, fewer and fewer of our citizens will get a thorough exposure to the doctrines our government was founded on and the historical reasons behind them. We would have no reason to fear an influx of new foreigners if this influx was not accompanied by an agenda to replace the teaching of liberal principles of limited government, capitalism, and the open society, with the reactionary doctrines of cultural relativism, state worship, anti-choice, anti-trade, and rationalizations for restrictions on speech (hate speech laws, etc.). Of course, at this time in our history our freedoms are more at threat from the Right than the Left. But the agenda of the Left, to take down liberalism in their own way, is nothing to sneeze at either. The only mistake is to put the blame on foreigners instead of where it belongs - on the heads of reactionary elements, Left and Right.

|5.7.06 @ 2:46AM|#

"There were several hundred Tejanos who fought and died alongside Crockett at the Alamo.

Because Texas wasn't a part of America yet, I guess we can forgive them for having primarily spoken Spanish."

I suppose that it is relatively futile to comment at the end of a dead and/or dying thread, but I would like to correct several errors in the above. There were only about two hundred defenders at the Battle of the Alamo and the great majority - almost all- were Anglos. Every last one of them, or nearly so, was put to the sword by that paragon of gentlemanliness and human decency, Generalissimo Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna...or as he liked to refer to himself: the Napolean of the West. The few women and children there were spared by "El Magnifico".

The defenders refered to themselves as "Texians" and sometimes as "Texicans". Most of them spoke English as their primary tongue, though I would imagine that they knew some Spanish as well. German was also spoken.

It is certainly true that many on the side of the rebels in the Texas war for independence from Mexico were Hispanic; apparently they cared as little for the tyrany of the Emperor as did the Anglos. One can argue whether the term "Tejano" is of recent invention, but the fact remains that there were relatively few of them in Texas in 1836. Maybe three thousand or so to about one hundred thousand Anglos or white Europeans, not counting Santa Anna's army. Indeed, there were few people at all in Texas at that time. Even including the indians there were substantialy less than one million people occupying several million square miles of territory. A fascinating thought.

One last thing: though I hate to disillusion some at H&R of their OWN special variety of bigotry, not all people from Tennesee are or were ignorant, bucktoothed, hillbillies. David Crockett certainly wasn't, although it is said that he deliberately cultivated that image at times.

|5.7.06 @ 2:50AM|#

"There were several hundred Tejanos who fought and died alongside Crockett at the Alamo.

Because Texas wasn't a part of America yet, I guess we can forgive them for having primarily spoken Spanish."

I suppose that it is relatively futile to comment at the end of a dead and/or dying thread, but I would like to correct several errors in the above. There were only about two hundred defenders at the Battle of the Alamo and the great majority - almost all- were Anglos or Europeans. Every last one of them, or nearly so, was put to the sword by that paragon of gentlemanliness and human decency, Generalissimo Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna...or as he liked to refer to himself: the Napolean of the West. The few women and children there were spared by "El Magnifico".

The defenders refered to themselves as "Texians" and sometimes as "Texicans". Most of them spoke English as their primary tongue, though I would imagine that they knew some Spanish as well. German was also spoken.

It is certainly true that many on the side of the rebels in the Texas war for independence from Mexico were Hispanic; apparently they cared as little for the tyrany of the Emperor as did the Anglos. One can argue whether the term "Tejano" is of recent invention, but the fact remains that there were relatively few of them in Texas in 1836. Maybe three thousand or so to about one hundred thousand Anglos or white Europeans, not counting Santa Anna's army. Indeed, there were few people at all in Texas at that time. Even including the indians there were substantialy less than one million people occupying several million square miles of territory. A fascinating thought.

One last thing: though I hate to disillusion some at H&R of their OWN special variety of bigotry, not all people from Tennesee are or were ignorant, bucktoothed, hillbillies. David Crockett certainly wasn't, although it is said that he deliberately cultivated that image at times.

|5.7.06 @ 2:55AM|#

And at the moment I wish to hell I had one of his squirrel guns. Damned server squirrels!
Sorry for the double post.

|5.7.06 @ 6:09AM|#

Bill Poser at Language Log:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003121.html#more

|5.7.06 @ 10:13AM|#

I believe most of you missed the point, that I believe Nick was trying to make. The whole illegal fiasco and this bill in particular, is a red herring trying divert attention before the mid-term elections. The republicans are holding the bag for the unprecident expansion in government spending, and unpopular occupation that really never had anything to do with the war on terror, and a secretive government that is doing its damnest to roll back any and every right to privacym that we thought we had. Instead of looking for donkeys to pin the populist scapegoat on, they should be returning to the mantra good government is small government; but instead they are proofing Jefferson's quote that" the natural course is for the power of government to expand and the liberty of the people is to decrease. With the way it seems now, the blood of Patriots and Tyrants is not nourishing the tree of liberty

|5.7.06 @ 11:27AM|#

Well, given masculine libertoid fascination with SciFi comic books or whatever the hell Brian Doherty is going on about today, that is unlikely to happen while we half-dozen liberettes are still fertile. Unless you are as good-looking as Nick, that is. -Bee

Why is it, do you suppose, that there are so few female libertarians?

My offhanded guess is that feminism divided us into liberal Career Women or conservative Stay-at-Home-Moms. But since most women are trying to do both why no recognition that libertarianism is in our collective long-term interest? (mostly rhetorical questions.)

Agreed, though, that if more libertarian men looked like Nick, that would most certainly help. ;)

|5.7.06 @ 1:47PM|#

My guess is that unfortunately, the movement is dominated by comic book and SCI FI fans, who may have never talked to a real female. I say this not as an insult to the movement, but in disappointment that the mainstream doesn't get it, and most of you don't care.

|5.7.06 @ 2:56PM|#

"LIBERALS SUCK, JUST ASK MONICA"

but do they swallow as well?

oh.....and fuck o'reilly

John T. Kennedy|5.7.06 @ 11:34PM|#

So Nick wants Alexander to stop wasting time on nonbinding resolutions and get back to doing the people's work.

Great.

You damn policy wonks just can't leave well enough alone, can you?

|5.8.06 @ 1:03AM|#

I personally thought the jacket was fairly stylish.
I just goes to show... no accounting for taste

"Jesus will Rule with a Rod of Iron Like it or not"
Some things are to funny for words

|5.8.06 @ 1:47AM|#

"We would have no reason to fear an influx of new foreigners if this influx was not accompanied by an agenda to replace the teaching of liberal principles of limited government, capitalism, and the open society, with the reactionary doctrines of cultural relativism, state worship, anti-choice, anti-trade, and rationalizations for restrictions on speech (hate speech laws, etc.)."

But are immigrants more susecptible to this agenda than anyone else? If anything they might be more resistant to statist agendas. Also, unlikely that current Republicans are the best safeguards for a liberal society - that's letting the wolves guard the henhouse.

Reason.com

New at Reason

VikingMoose|5.5.06 @ 2:50PM|#

Timothy|5.5.06 @ 2:59PM|#

Warren|5.5.06 @ 4:52PM|#

Garth|5.5.06 @ 4:56PM|#

Mike|5.5.06 @ 4:59PM|#

Mike|5.5.06 @ 5:04PM|#

Mike|5.5.06 @ 5:04PM|#

Wild Pegasus|5.5.06 @ 5:05PM|#

Garth|5.5.06 @ 5:19PM|#

Timothy|5.5.06 @ 5:24PM|#

Timothy|5.5.06 @ 5:27PM|#

Tim Mathews|5.5.06 @ 7:56PM|#

strat|5.5.06 @ 9:51PM|#

Sandy|5.6.06 @ 1:33AM|#

b-psycho|5.6.06 @ 1:55AM|#

Warren|5.6.06 @ 9:58AM|#

dhex|5.6.06 @ 1:20PM|#

Warren|5.6.06 @ 3:33PM|#

Michael Geary|5.6.06 @ 3:38PM|#

RSDavis|5.6.06 @ 4:13PM|#

Tim Mathews|5.6.06 @ 5:24PM|#