Yesterday, I saw a blog post on a Nashville “community” site called the Enclave about the English-only amendment to Metro’s Charter. The gist of the post was a hit piece on Councilman Eric Crafton (can any liberal make an argument without calling their opponent names?).

Anyway, I commented on the post, but I don’t expect it to pass the moderator (why let an opposing, logical opinion loose on your blog?). So, here’s what I had to say:

Yes, I agree. It will certainly be the end of our fine City as we know it (despite our new Savior being inaugurated today) if Metro Council has to conduct business in English.

It seems to be the MO of the anti-English folks to put up false arguments and then shoot them down in order to convince folks that this is a bad Amendment.

This statement here: “A Metro employee helping a first generation immigrant in distress when she has the skills to do it?” reveals that you actually haven’t read the amendment.

As does this one: “Federal money to provide assistance to help Metro employees do their jobs effectively”.

No one in the anti-English side has yet to provide a logical reason to oppose this amendment (much less Amendment 2, which the anti-English folks lump in with it, making those who vote based on yard signs even more ignorant).

If the anti-English amendment fails, perhaps some of the people who were against it can go over to France and make them provide services to non-citizens in English. That way if I ever decide to move there, I won’t have to bother learning French or even assimilating.

Early voting is over in Nashville, and the polls will be open this Thursday, January 22. If you think Metro Council’s meetings and official business should be conducted in a language other than English, by all means vote against Amendment 1. If you think it should be nearly impossible for the people of Nashville to amend their charter, then vote against Amendment 2.

But if you believe that English should be the only language Metro does business in, then you need to vote for Amendment 1.