Mis felicitaciones a Albita Rivera, representante plus (que cuando vino Jesse Jackson a Puerto Rico se refirió a él como "el negro ese") por el Proyecto de la Cámara 4134. Este le hace justicia a todos los puertorriqueños de ascendencia francesa o corsa y permite que todos esos francoparlantes realengos e incomprendidos que tenemos en Puerto Rico desde el siglo 18 por fin puedan entendernos. En Yauco, donde por mandato municipal los letreros deben estar en español, inglés y francés están de fiesta (Yauco tiene una gran población de descendientes corsos).
He aquí el proyecto de Albita que favorece a los francófonos:
He aquí el proyecto de Albita que favorece a los francófonos:
Para que el examen del GED (General Equivalency Diploma) se ofrezca en español, francés e inglés; que el candidato seleccione libremente el idioma en que desea tomar el mismo; y se le expedirá el certificado en el idioma en que lo tomó sin que se le requiera para la expedición del mismo el haber aprobado una parte en inglés además de las de español como se hace en la actualidad.Estoy hinchado de orgullo. Espero que los descendientes de alemanes, rusos, chinos, italianos, nigerianos, etc, le reclamen a la Albita que el susodicho examen sea ofrecido en sus respectivos idiomas. Merci.
Otra prueba más de que el legislador a tiempo completo es un peligro para el país. ¡Las cosas absurdas que inventan para matar el tiempo!
ResponderBorrarIvonne:
ResponderBorrar¿Qué hacer? Honestamente esta es la pregunta que tenemos que contestar porque esta gente tiene la Legislatura secuestrada. Sólo se representan a sí mismos.
¿Qué hacer?
¿Será para tener en cuenta a los quebequences? Y a propósito, el nombre correcto sería más bien "General Education Development", según http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GED. Id est, ¿ni siquiera intentó informarse?
ResponderBorrarC'est pas possible !! :)
mi propuesta más sincera:
ResponderBorrarGOLPE DE ESTADO!!!!!!
SEGOLENE ROYAL'S SUPPORT OF PORTO RICO INDEPENDENCE TAKES HARVARD BY STORM!
ResponderBorrarDear Dr. Vázquez,
Salut! I am sending you a similar request to the one I sent another prominent Puerto Rican doctor and intellectual.
Could you please help Harvard's "intelligentsia" by offering a brief commentary about why it is not strange for the topic of Puerto Rico's status to be discussed in Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government's "Aula Magna" where important figures such as Manuel Rodriguez Orellanta and Juan Manuel Garcia Pasalacqua have spoken before?
The issue has come up because Segolene Royal supported Puerto Rico independence at the JFK School of Government. Some people have been scandalized that US Democratic values have been questioned in the sanctuary of Academic American politics (JFK School) by discussing a "thorny and controversial" issue such as Puerto Rico in the presence of a foreign dignatary such as Segolene Royale. They are more indignant that Segolene Royal took the question about Puerto Rico, and that she was willing to reply that she supported Porto Rico's independance as long as the International socialiste (IS) supports it.
What is so surprising about it! France's history is intimately connected to that of Porto Rico for almost five centuries, why are some people scandalized that Porto Rico would be discussed in the context of France? Maybe an internationally-respected Historian such as you could offer them some timely-necessary perspective on why France's politicians are more than "authorized" to call for the independence of U.S. territories if the U.S. continues to abdicate responsibility about resolving its colonial problem (as France was forced to do).
Maybe you and/or another Porto Rican may help my fellow French colleagues here to be less ignorant about Porto Rico (or, should I say Puerto Rico, even if the English and French call it Porto Rico?)
Here are the links of examples of these interesting debates that have taken Harvard's blogs and "political pundits" by storm:
http://artgoldhammer.blogspot.com/ (This is one of the emblematic blogs where the debate has been raging, among others; the links containing examples of some of the actual commentary threads are included beneath)
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9077113549693847021&postID=7959594141588317540&isPopup=true
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9077113549693847021&postID=9182509249884531661&isPopup=true
I have had to bite my toungue not to say what I am sure would be best said by people of your vast knowledge, culture and intellect.
Plus, I have to admit that while I do not know much about Puerto Rico, my intuition tells me that Puerto Rico has all the reasons to be debated at Harvard and no person should be placed under a "MORDACHE" (mordaza?) just for calling for Puerto Rico's independence from the United States.
Was Miss Royal ("Sego") right to talk about this at Harvard?
I hope you can offer some desperately needed perspective at these Harvard blogs, since that may help educate the Harvard student-publications that are writing about these topics.
Respectfully and expectant of any kind help you may offer,
Marie Luise
Dear Dr. Edwin,
ResponderBorrarI forgot to send you the specific quote of the misunderstood interpretation of the question that led to Ms. S. Royal's support for Puerto Rico's independence, which in turn, has been followed with all the debate and questions that have been flowering Harvard's atmosphere here ever since:
...
"The forum once again highlighted the challenges that a politician faces. The first question from the audience called for a statement of Royal's position on the demand of Puerto Ricans to be granted the right to vote in US elections--not a matter likely to have been given much thought by la présidente de Poitou-Charentes. Ségo maintained her poise admirably and continued to smile while much of the audience groaned and scowled"
[before supporting Puerto Rico's independence on the condition that the International socialiste supports it together with her].
http://artgoldhammer.blogspot.com/2008/02/sgo-at-kennedy-school.html
Dearest Dr. Vazquez,
ResponderBorrarSalut!
Could you please help educate "Harvard's intelligentsia", since a great deal of them think Puerto Rico is a dismissable issue and less important than the "steroid controversy"; why are they so arrogant and dismissive of Puerto Ricans!?
The issue has come up because Segolene Royal supported Puerto Rico independence at the JFK School of Government. Some people have been scandalized that US Democratic values have been questioned in the sanctuary of Academic American politics (JFK School) by discussing a "thorny and controversial" issue such as Puerto Rico in the presence of a foreign dignatary such as Segolene Royale. They are more indignant that Segolene Royal took the question about Puerto Rico, and that she was willing to reply that she supported Porto Rico's independance as long as the International socialiste (IS) supports it.
What is so surprising about it! France's history is intimately connected to that of Porto Rico for almost five centuries, why are some people scandalized that Porto Rico would be discussed in the context of France? Maybe an internationally-respected Historian such as you could offer them some timely-necessary perspective on why France's politicians are more than "authorized" to call for the independence of U.S. territories if the U.S. continues to abdicate responsibility about resolving its colonial problem (as France was forced to do).
Maybe you and/or another Porto Rican may help my fellow French colleagues here to be less ignorant about Porto Rico (or, should I say Puerto Rico, even if the English and French call it Porto Rico?)
Here are the links of examples of these interesting debates that have taken Harvard's blogs and "political pundits" by storm:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9077113549693847021&postID=9182509249884531661&isPopup=true
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9077113549693847021&postID=9182509249884531661&isPopup=true
I have had to bite my toungue not to say what I am sure would be best said by people of your vast knowledge, culture and intellect.
Plus, I have to admit that while I do not know much about Puerto Rico, my intuition tells me that Puerto Rico has all the reasons to be debated at Harvard and no person should be placed under a "MORDACHE" (mordaza?) just for calling for Puerto Rico's independence from the United States.
Was Miss Royal ("Sego") right to talk about this at Harvard?
I hope you can offer some desperately needed perspective at these Harvard blogs, since that may help educate the Harvard student-publications that are writing about these topics.
Respectfully and expectant of any kind help you may offer, your admirer and faithful reader,
MarieLo...'uise ;)
Hi Marie Louise:
ResponderBorrarI am not a historian but a scientist and educator. And I am Puerto Rican. Although at this time I can not go into all the details of your comment, suffice it to say that any dignatary, from France or Congo for that matter, has all the right to support Puerto Rican independence.
That some people would find Royal's support for Puerto Rican independence improper or surprising demonstrates the incredible degree of historical and political hypocrisy of many North American ignorants. Were it not for France's support of American independence, including arms and soldiers who died on American soil in the 1770's, the U.S. would still be a British colony.
Merci.
De rien, Dr. Vazquez!
ResponderBorrarWould you consider educating these "helplessly self-centered souls" that are discussing this issue without the benefit of a Puerto Rican's perspective on the matter?
The link of the discussion is here:
http://artgoldhammer.blogspot.com/2008/02/sgo-at-kennedy-school.html
I think that if you told them what you replied to me here, they would benefit enormously from your wise perspective.
All yours,
MarieLo...'uise ;)
Dear María Luisa:
ResponderBorrarAs requested I posted in the blog you referred to. You may write to me at edwinvazquez@hotmail.com to share information.
I have been to Harvard two times, I know the JFK's "Aula MAgna" and simply love the whole Harvard atmosphere.
Keep up the discussion...
Great!
ResponderBorrarThanks so much, Edwin.
I really liked your post on that blog.
See you around,
Ma'Lo'uise
Hola Edwin:
ResponderBorrarEste es un nuevo intento por dejar un comentario que se refiere a ocurrido en Harvard que describe Marie Luise. Ella me escribió y me pidió que comentara y le pedí en mi blog que me diera su email para enterarme mejor de lo ocurrido. No he sabido más de ella porque parece le molestó que no hiciera lo mismo que tú, que pusiste un comentario en el blog del Dr. Goldhammer. (Muy bueno por cierto).
Estoy investigando más el asunto porque quiero saber exactamente lo ocurrido y ya me puse en contacto con la persona que hizo la primera pregunta según averigué. Una vez tenga toda la información escribiré un post sobre la controversia.
En el comentario que se perdió en el éter, te puse además una sugerencia y es la siguiente: que empecemos en nuestros blogs al menos a eliminar eso de "americanos" y "norteamericanos" cuando nos referimos a los de EE.UU. Lo primero somos todos en el hemisferio y lo segundo es injusto con los canadienses que no tienen la culpa de que los estadounidenses se apropiaran de el nombre. Yo soy consciente de esto desde que trabajé como Editora General del proyecto de la Enciclopedia de Puerto Rico que se supone vaya en línea muy pronto. (Yo renuncié hace año y pico). Fue uno de los traductores de la EPR (que es estadounidense y vive en PR) me llamó la atención y cambié todas las referencias en cada una de las entradas que yo tuve a cargo. Es una sugerencia..
Saludos.
Ivonne:
ResponderBorrarPresumo que sugieres estadounidense como el gentilicio...
Exacto. Y decir "ciudadanía estadounidense" y no "ciudadanía americana", invasión estadounidense y hasta Guerra Hispano-cubano-estadounidense cuantas veces se pueda. Da trabajo al principio por la costumbre pero vale la pena,creo yo.
ResponderBorrarSí vale la pena pues yo he usado los tres términos por falta de costumbre. Estadounidense será aunque haya unos Estados Unidos de México, pero qué le vamos a hacer. Por lo menos no tenemos problemas con el término "mexicano".
ResponderBorrarEste blog ha sido eliminado por un administrador de blog.
ResponderBorrarMr. uknown and mostly-ignored blogger with very little influence, is it the case that the Puerto Ricans too nosy for their own good? Is it the case that you could you explain how you created so many problems for our France's National Leader, Nicolas Sarkozy, now that you reenergized Segolene by writing about her "Vive le Porto Rico Libre" moment at Harvard University? And we are happy to offer a friendly suggest that you don't go off to your publishing anything else about Porto Rico and France or you will hear from us. If you want to hear from us at your commentary forum, that is your choice. But we know how to refute those intromissions into our politics.
ResponderBorrarMonsieur le blogger, Et ne partez pas en publiant autre chose de Porto Rico "libre" et la France ou vous recevrez des nouvelles de nous (au forum des commentaires).
Si vous voulez recevoir des nouvelles de nous à votre forum de commentaire, qui est votre choix. Mais nous savons comment réfuter ceux-là ont non demandé intrommissions dans notre politique.
Happy to know you are in love with France, but please let France have its good Centre-Right government that does good to any country like it happened to Chile, Spain and Argentina, right?