hahahaha! Thx. I needed that laugh after all of this!
Will you concede that there is no official National language of the United States?
Will you concede that English is the de facto national language of the United States?
Regards,
Shodan
Of course!
I don’t think anyone is arguing about that. It’s the language of law and business. The distinction between a de facto and de jure national language is that people are required to learn the latter, but not the former (though it is obviously of immense benefit if they do in either circumstance).
Sure. If I belive wikipedia! 
Do you?
Random question; does any country have White/Caucasian History Month?
Yes. But we usually refer to them as January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December.
most of the time…do you?
The US has Irish-American Heritage Month, which is “official” in the sense that it’s the result of presidential proclamation. There’s also Confederate History Month, enacted by six state legislatures. It’s not racial, per se, but I think most would agree that the people celebrating it are unlikely to be nonwhites.
Black History Month has no such official standing.
This stopped being cute back when…hell, it never was cute, except in your own mind. Can you please a straight answer to this question:
Do you concede that English is the de facto, and NOT de jure official language of the United States?
Google “Irish-American Month”, “Italian-American Month”, or “German-American Month.”
Do you concede that he never claimed that English was the de jure official language of the United States?
Regards,
Shodan
Do you actually know what “official” means, or are you just blowing smoke? Saying that English is the official language is wrong, no matter how you dress it up in bad cites and off-topic definitions from questionable sources.
He certainly implied that it is, or that it should be.
If the world were created last year and all racial groups received a roughly proportional share of wealth, power, etc., then there might be no reason to allow specifically black groups but disallow white ones. (I say “might” because just being a minority might be enough to warrant having a minority-specific group, but that’s not my main point). But the world was not created last year. For hundreds of years, black people in this country were subjected to absolutely deplorable treatment. Even after the end of slavery, they were violently prevented from attaining wealth and political power. Only about FIFTY years ago did (most of) this violence end. This OBVIOUSLY had an effect on their progeny (how could it not have?). Seeing as the treatment of blacks in this country was massively unjust, these effects should be eliminated as much as possible. I find the claims of “hey this is racist against white people!” to be ignorant and embarrassing. The justification for these so-called racist policies has everything to do with historical context. The claim that there should never, under any circumstances, be discrimination (i.e., a difference in rules/norms, whatever) on the basis of race is ridiculous, like claiming that when a court orders one person to pay restitution to another it is not treating them equally in the eyes of the law. (Note I am not saying that the allowance of a Congressional Black Caucus is some kind of punishment to white people)
I don’t see any reason that left-handed members of Congress couldn’t have a caucus. Probably be a treat for them to go to dinners where they don’t have to joust elbows. Of course, they would aptly be named the Sinister Caucus, which will lead to confusion.
Ok, we can have a Congressional White Caucus until whites are equally represented and prosperous in our nation…
Okay, I guess we can stop having one now.
Yes, I do.
No, it’s not.
You have already conceded that English is, in fact, the official language of the US. Or did you concede that it was without understanding what *de facto *means?
Regards,
Shodan