I have been. Here's proof! 
Posted on 01/21/2004 9:39:40 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
There were three official Democratic responses to President Bush's State of the Union speech Tuesday night. There was the foreign-policy response — "America must be a light to the world, not just a missile" — delivered by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. There was the domestic-policy response — "We can also show our patriotism while strengthening agriculture and rural America by labeling all food products with their country of origin" — delivered by Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle. And then there was the Spanish-language response — the first ever — delivered by New Mexico governor, and former Clinton energy secretary, Bill Richardson. The Pelosi/Daschle speeches, dutifully televised by network- and cable-television-news outlets, followed the standard format of opposition-party responses. They faulted the president on a variety of issues but emphasized the need for all Americans to work together. In line with tradition, they did not make starkly political appeals like, "Please vote for Democrats this November." In fact, neither lawmaker mentioned the election at all. The Richardson address was another matter. Billed as the first-ever Democratic response for Spanish speakers — party chairman Terry McAuliffe called it a "historic moment" — it was nothing at all like a traditional response and was in fact an openly political appeal for Hispanic votes. (The following description is based on the English translation of Richardson's remarks provided by the Democratic National Committee.) Richardson's address was mostly about the president's immigration initiative. There was a certain irony in that, since he began his speech by saying, "The majority of American citizens believe that as Hispanics we only care about issues like immigration and civil rights." Even though Richardson said Hispanics in fact care deeply about all the major issues facing Americans, he made only cursory mentions of those issues — for example, he did not discuss Iraq at all, except to say that Hispanics are serving there. Instead, Richardson focused on immigration. He called the president's plan "a small step forward" that included "some positive points." But he said the plan was a "dead end" for Hispanics because it "does not help immigrant workers to obtain the golden dream: legalization and residency without impunity." Richardson also used the issue as an opening to attack the Republican party in general, saying "The Republican Party has collectively ruined much for us." Now, he said, Bush's plan "is even being strongly opposed by conservative members of his own party." Then Richardson addressed the upcoming election. "We are prepared to elect the next President of the United States, and with our growing numbers we can decide the election," he said. "In this election, the Hispanic vote will be critical because of our large numbers in states like Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, California, Nevada, New Jersey, and New York." Richardson urged Hispanics to register to vote and then said, "The Democratic Party has always been with us, and we should not forget who really are our true friends and allies." And that was the end of Richardson's brief speech. Such a baldly political appeal would have violated the decorum of the nationally televised addresses delivered by the president and his Democratic rivals. But in the Spanish-language speech, unseen by most Americans and ignored by the media, Richardson was able to turn a response to the State of the Union address into a frankly political commercial.
In fact, I wonder what kind of impact CFR has on such blatant, political speech?
Richardson will be the VP because Edwards needs the age and experience so voters will be more comfortable, much the same way Bush surrounded himself with old guys. And Richardson's ethnicity counters Bush's overtures to Hispanics. If Edwards had been from the west coast it would have been Ford from Tenn. but since he is a southerner it will be BR.
...legalization and residency without impunity."
Either Richardson or the translator don't know the meaning of the word "impunity."
I hold a job and pay federal taxes. I do not presume to tell Texians what is best for them as I have only been here a year -- nor would I ever be so bold as to try. I speak the English language and know very little about my Swedish ancestry. I am not looking for any special rights or privileges. I have a desire to live in this Texas society with respect for the history and the traditions of this great state.
Can any illegals who crossed the Rio Grande say the same thing? Are they looking to blend in and live in a Texan or American society, or do they have other plans and/or long-term goals? I am a liitle concerned about the Mexican consulates opening in major cities throughout the country, as they exclusively serve the special interests of the millions of Mexicans here, NOT Texans, NOT Americans.
Please do not assume that all who come from north of the Red River are here to make your life miserable. I understand that a society has establishments and traditions and I respect them, just as many other transplants to Texas.
If Edwards wins the nomination, it would not be surprising if he tries to set another "first"--first Hispanic, first Asian-American, first something--to garner a lot of media praise.
I see nothing in my previous post that deserved a flame. I did not insult you. I simply asked that you understand that not all yankees want to tear apart the fabric that is Texas - a point that seems to be lost on a lot of people. Your post and the words you used sounded rather sincere to me, and I was unable to sense humor in what I read. Perhaps the /sarcasm tag would have helped there.
I have been. Here's proof!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.