Re: Library: Ok, not exactly the library, but a side comment from the thread:
- - - WM wrote (excerpt) - - - WM: The director of the library is not a public official; the board members of the library are public officials. The director of the library is their employee. So you elected this board to hire a director and to use its discretion to do that, but now you want to renege on the deal you made by voting? The board is saying that's what it will cost to get the skills they need. - - - end excerpt - - - Hold up. When I vote, I have a choice which candidate I want to represent me in a particular office. I do NOT give them autonomous control, I give them the right to represent me. A good politician should provide leadership and present strong options and ideas, but they should always be listening to what the people who elected them want. They are not elected rulers, they are elected leaders and representatives. We elected the library board (although, how many people do you suppose even had a clue who they were voting for) and it will be their job to select hire a new director. If they do their jobs as they should, they will consider public opinion and sentiment as they make that decision. It may be that they decide to go against whatever the public sentiment may be, and sometimes that's the right thing to do, but they need to consider it. That final decision will also be made constrained by rules created by other people who we have elected. If those rules need to be changed, then we will need those representatives to listen to us as well. Btw, the idea of tying the salary caps for government jobs to AMI instead of the Governor's salary sounds pretty good to me. Re: Fare collection: I agree that an honor system for collecting fares is going to result in a lot of people cheating the system. I'd rather not see that. If someone can afford to pay the fare, they should. If someone can't afford the fare, we should look at finding a way to help them get passes than expect them to break the law to ride free. Having a law that is expected to be broken and sometimes responded to is a great way to encourage inequitable treatment of people (eg: profiling, etc.) Besides, if they get caught, can the really afford the ticket? It seems like this theory would encourage a downward spiral. RE: Multiple Languages As I mentioned before, I think there's probably a better solution, mainly because the question of which three languages is problematic and the answer to that question will change over time. However, I do feel that we should make provisions for people who are not yet proficient at english. In the discussion regarding multiple languages on fare cards and machines for the new transit system, an anti-immigrant sentiment has come up. One of the arguments brought up to support the "english only" point of view was regarding illegal immigrants. The need for multiple languages is not to support illegal immigrants, it is to support legal immigrants who have not yet learned english. As far as I know, there are no immigrant communities in Minneapolis that are populous and insular enough that they would have the desire or capability of not learning english. Are there actually second generation Hmong who don't know english by the time they are teenagers? An elder or middle age first generation immigrant may learn little to none, but it seems to me that the younger first generation and pretty much all the second generation immigrants will learn it. By the third generation, they'll have Minnesotan accents. The reason we need to support multiple languages is to make it as easy as possible for new Americans and resident aliens to be a part of society. If you think we shouldn't encourage immigrants, I have one question for you - what tribe are you from? We were all immigrants once. Yeah, those who are of various heritages may feel that since their ancestors had it tough, new immigrants should as well, but I'd like to think we are evolving as a society. Or maybe we should hang a "no vacancy" sign on the statue of liberty... A person from Somalia or Argentina or Korea who has received their citizenship has every bit as much of a right to be here as you do. They are every bit as American as you are. It is quite likely that they appreciate the fact that they are here and know more about what it means to be American than many native born citizens for whom "American History" and "Civics" class was a bunch of boring dates and dry facts. And then, this comment was made: "And you can read my earlier post about immigration, and see that if the doors to the terrorists would have not been left open, Arabic would not be a problem now." Reading that statement made me feel physically ill. I think about T.A. - a second generation egyptian who grew up near one of my good friends and runs a couple stores over in St. Paul. Or S.W. - a second generation christian Palestinian who runs a few shops up in the burbs. Or another egyptian, I don't recall his name, who works at the Sky Cafe/smoke shop downtown - he always has a smile for me and always wants to know how I'm doing. I have a hard time understanding his accent from time to time, but we've talked for upwards of an hour some days. These people all speak Arabic and when they or their parents first got here, they may not have known english or may not have known it well. These people are not terrorists and the implication that they should be suspect is highly offensive. Did Timothy McVeigh speak Arabic? If you want to discuss whether or not it makes sense to put other languages on public services, and how much we should or should not support people who can't speak or read english, fine, that may be a discussion worth having. Personally I think the answer lies in finding the proper balance between encouraging everyone to learn english and giving enough support to new immigrants so that they have the opportunity to do so while making a living. However, to make a connection between our immigrant communities and the spectre of terrorism as a reason not to support other languages is ridiculous. To use Arabic to do so is even more ridiculous considering that the languages proposed were English, Spanish, and Hmong. RE: Terrorism and how to "fight" it in your daily life: Terrorism can not be stopped through heightened security. You may catch 9 out of ten, but one will always get through. If you want to have a better chance of catching a terrorist, the solution is not to add more barriers and isolation, it is to open things up. There are some people who are skilled enough to pretend to be a person who they are not, but the better you get to know someone, the harder it is for them to maintain a facade, especially if they are fanatical or zealots. Good spies are typically fairly detached from their principles. If you look at those who have been committed acts of terror, you will typically find that they were removed from main stream society. If you're concerned about Arabic speaking terrorists, start making friends with people who speak Arabic. If one of them happens to be here for nefarious purposes, you'll have a lot better chance uncovering it by talking to them than avoiding them. However, all that is likely to happen is that you'll make some good friends and, if you're lucky, eat some great food. Personally, I'm a lot more concerned about terrorists who wear ties and wrap themselves up in the American flag while destroying everything it stands for. - Jason Goray, Sheridan, NE (If you have someone who is intelligent, resourceful, full of hatred towards you, and willing to die to hurt you, the only defense is to take away the hatred.) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
