GOP give two completely different responses to Obama - one in English, different one in Spanish

[rdean]

In GOP State of the Union responses, different messages in English and Spanish on immigration | Naked Politics

Haley:

At the same time, that does not mean we just flat out open our borders. We can’t do that. We cannot continue to allow immigrants to come here illegally. And in this age of terrorism, we must not let in refugees whose intentions cannot be determined.
We must fix our broken immigration system. That means stopping illegal immigration. And it means welcoming properly vetted legal immigrants, regardless of their race or religion. Just like we have for centuries.
I have no doubt that if we act with proper focus, we can protect our borders, our sovereignty and our citizens, all while remaining true to America’s noblest legacies.

Diaz-Balart
At the same time, it's obvious that our immigration system needs to be reformed. The current system puts our national security at risk and is an obstacle for our economy.
It's essential that we find a legislative solution to protect our nation, defend our borders, offer a permanent and human solution to those who live in the shadows, respect the rule of law, modernize the visa system and push the economy forward.
I have no doubt that if we work together, we can achieve this and continue to be faithful to the noblest legacies of the United States.

---------------
Totally hilarious! They did the same exact thing last year.

8 ways the GOP’s State of the Union response was different in Spanish — and why it matters

Clearly the GOP believes America is too stupid to figure it out.​

 

[TheOldSchool]

It's hard to juggle appealing to xenophobe racists and normal human beings at the same time

 

[sarahgop]

Basically, the GOP said lets welcome in rapists so women wont be safe on the streets. Iam beginning to think the GOP does despise women.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Basically, the GOP said lets welcome in rapists so women wont be safe on the streets. Iam beginning to think the GOP does despise women.

Yeah that's what they did. Go Trump!

 

[BULLDOG]

Basically, the GOP said lets welcome in rapists so women wont be safe on the streets. Iam beginning to think the GOP does despise women.

You know that's something a crazy person might say......right?

 

[emilynghiem]

It's hard to juggle appealing to xenophobe racists and normal human beings at the same time

Dear TheOldSchool
Any leader who expects to represent the ENTIRE nation faces the challenge of including all people of all views and beliefs, right or wrong, left right or center.

What isn't logical is expecting govt and leaders to do contradictory things.
If we want equal protection of the laws, we can't keep electing lobbying and voting for policies that exclude other people of groups.
That's like asking for special interests, wanting our beliefs imposed at the exclusion of other people we want to deny the same benefits to.
Then we complain the other group is discriminating, while we do the same?

That is contradictory with equality.
If you don't like others to be xenophobic and exclusive,
it makes sense not to exclude others with a similar attitude towards them.
Otherwise you go back and forth, round and round in circles.

Any politician can play you, play one side against the other to profit from your conflicts.
Then when nothing gets solved that way, conveniently blame the other group, so both sides draw money from constituents to keep fighting.

Not sustainable, Not solving any problems.

The REAL leadership TheOldSchool
CAN deal with both left and right, religious and secular, workers and managers.
Include everyone in working on solutions.

If we don't strive for social equality, what business do we have demanding our leaders show equal respect?
If we commit to include and respect all people of all parties equally in seeking common ground solutions,
wouldn't we raise the bar and start rewarding, appointing and electing quality leaders that can work with everyone without compromising any principles.
Wouldn't that be a more consistent standard, especially given what we are asking for. If we want Equal Justice under law, doesn't that include everyone?

 

[rdean]

It's hard to juggle appealing to xenophobe racists and normal human beings at the same time

Dear TheOldSchool
Any leader who expects to represent the ENTIRE nation faces the challenge of including all people of all views and beliefs, right or wrong, left right or center.

What isn't logical is expecting govt and leaders to do contradictory things.
If we want equal protection of the laws, we can't keep electing lobbying and voting for policies that exclude other people of groups.
That's like asking for special interests, wanting our beliefs imposed at the exclusion of other people we want to deny the same benefits to.
Then we complain the other group is discriminating, while we do the same?

That is contradictory with equality.
If you don't like others to be xenophobic and exclusive,
it makes sense not to exclude others with a similar attitude towards them.
Otherwise you go back and forth, round and round in circles.

Any politician can play you, play one side against the other to profit from your conflicts.
Then when nothing gets solved that way, conveniently blame the other group, so both sides draw money from constituents to keep fighting.

Not sustainable, Not solving any problems.

The REAL leadership TheOldSchool
CAN deal with both left and right, religious and secular, workers and managers.
Include everyone in working on solutions.

If we don't strive for social equality, what business do we have demanding our leaders show equal respect?
If we commit to include and respect all people of all parties equally in seeking common ground solutions,
wouldn't we raise the bar and start rewarding, appointing and electing quality leaders that can work with everyone without compromising any principles.
Wouldn't that be a more consistent standard, especially given what we are asking for. If we want Equal Justice under law, doesn't that include everyone?

Wow, that sounds like a coalition Party. And there is only one coalition party I know and it isn't 90% white.

 

[rdean]

Guessed which party I was talking about? 90% white?

 

[rdean]

Ah, a thread about crap Republicans pull that USMB Republicans can't dispute. Gotta love it.

 

[g5000]

I've read the English and Spanish versions. The only real difference is that in the Spanish version, any mention of the word "borders" is downplayed or omitted, as is the term "illegal immigration".

Overall, though, the message is the same. Our immigration system needs to be reformed. That was made plain in both languages.

There is nothing in the Spanish version which suggests amnesty for illegals. Those who say otherwise are wrong.


Nonetheless, it is inevitable amnesty will be granted to our illegal immigrants by the GOP. The GOP has known this for a long time, but have been keeping the rubes in the dark.

 

[PredFan]

Yes the GOP is getting more and more fraudulent, dishonest and corrupt. That supports our claim that they are becoming more like democrats every day.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"our" you gotta mouse in yer pocket?

 

[rdean]

I've read the English and Spanish versions. The only real difference is that in the Spanish version, any mention of the word "borders" is downplayed or omitted, as is the term "illegal immigration".

Overall, though, the message is the same. Our immigration system needs to be reformed. That was made plain in both languages.

There is nothing in the Spanish version which suggests amnesty for illegals. Those who say otherwise are wrong.


Nonetheless, it is inevitable amnesty will be granted to our illegal immigrants by the GOP. The GOP has known this for a long time, but have been keeping the rubes in the dark.

The only real difference is that in the Spanish version, any mention of the word "borders" is downplayed or omitted, as is the term "illegal immigration".

Yea, such a minor difference. It's a wonder they bothered. Perhaps if you thought about it, you could explain it.

 

[rdean]

Republicans hand over a general election ad.