Published: Dec 14, 2007
Salvation Army Faces English Language Lawsuit While GOP Stays Mum
by Daniel Gilbert

After top Republican Presidential Candidates spent weeks attempting to convince voters that they are the most conservative of the group, all have remained mum on a winning issue for Conservatives: the right of businesses and faith-based organizations to require employees to speak English while on the job.

My position is clear. English should be made the official language of the United States. English language should be a requirement for citizenship and a requirement in any job where two spoken languages would be a safety or customer service problem. The American people and the conservative leadership have become so worn down by the politically correct police that we cannot even stand in the gap for a Christian organization that does nothing but help others across the globe. What does that say about us and our leaders?

If the Bush administration's failure to protect our borders wasn't enough, now we have a loving and effective humanitarian organization who has to defend itself in a lawsuit that stems from these very same failed policies.

Not a single Top Republican Candidate has publicly weighed in on this issue or expressed support for the Salvation Army, which is currently being sued by the EEOC for requiring its employees to speak English. Yet, 77 percent of Americans agree that businesses have the right to demand their employees speak English while on the clock. Moreover, a summer 2006 Rasmussen poll stated that 85 percent of Americans (92 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of Democrats) believe English should be the official language of the United States.

The case revolves around two Salvation Army employees in Framingham, MA, who had the opportunity to learn English for five years, and were required to learn the language by the sixth year. The employees were fired and subsequently petitioned the EEOC to file suit against the Salvation Army for wrongful termination.

Nancy Pelosi and her House Democrats, under pressure from the Hispanic Caucus, attempted to defeat (unsuccessfully) an amendment attached to an appropriations bill to protect prosecuting such an organization by voting against the motion 218 to 186. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-ND) led the charge in defense of the Salvation Army.

Immigration will undoubtedly be a deciding factor in 2008. According to a recent Rasmussen poll in NH, immigration ranked higher than national security, our economy and Iraq among voters, particularly among Republicans. If immigration is a major factor, why is all quiet on the Republican front regarding the Salvation Army?

GOP front-runners may lack the political courage to support a Christian organization which is historically one of the largest social care programs in the world; Democrat front runners are safely dancing around the immigration issue because their party is so fractured on this subject.

If any of the top candidates wanted to separate themselves from the moderate bunch and emerge as the true conservative, they would have demanded other candidates reveal their position on this issue, in the likes of the feeding frenzy with Senator Clinton and driver's licenses for illegals in New York.

All top GOP candidates have publicly provided to voters, thus far, was to not raise their hand when Wolf Blitzer asked if any of them disagreed with English as the official language in the U.S. Their tough talk on this issue was under-whelming.

Unfortunately, the top candidates have a weak history regarding immigration policies. Rudy Giuliani kept sanctuary cities in NYC, John McCain co-sponsored the Amnesty Bill and Mitt Romney is a notorious flip-flopper on abortion, amnesty and gay marriage so we really don't know where he stands, even if he takes a stand.

Perhaps the most telling example of the top candidates' true position on this issue will be the video clips from the all-Spanish debate at the University of Miami, December 9, where Republican candidates don headphones and use translators to explain why they should be elected as the next President of the United States of America.

We The People Say No To Politicians!

In 2000, I voted for President Bush and the Republicans. I had high hopes that with the Republicans in control of the legislature and the executive branches that real change would occur in our government. I thought that the principles that we all thought the Republicans stood for would guide the Republicans to do what is best for the country. I thought I would see a new higher moral standard. What we got was corruption, bribes, moral decline, hearings with no action, tax breaks for big business, McCain Feingold and last year 15,000 earmarks.

We get a Republican majority in the Senate and a President who think that the best way to handle the illegal alien problem is to give them amnesty. And just last month we had a great break through with the North Koreans where they agreed to not do what they agreed to not do under Clinton. How much will it cost the American citizens this time?

There has to be a change in Presidential and Congressional leadership to affect change in this country. There has to be a way to get the politicians out and the statesmen in. Those politicians who vote only for the sake of the party, the lobbyist or big business have to be removed. To bring about substantial changes in the government, these new statesmen must control the House, Senate and the White House.

Daniel Gilbert is an independent columnist and presidential candidate

© Copyright 2004-2012 by Post Chronicle Corp.
Top of Page is best viewed with an 1024x768 screen resolution

tumblr stats

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of The Post Chronicle™. Since we offer our product free of charge, we run banner advertising in order to cover the operating costs of delivering the material. Read More Here  DMCA Policy Here  Privacy Policy Here