[robertt]

This is happening this afternoon, (29th), bet you haven't heard about this. I KNOW it's long but WELL worth reading. I KNOW it's Glenn Beck but........

Puerto Rican Statehood Ahead?
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
By Glenn Beck

I want to talk to you about the fundamental transformation of America. It could happen tomorrow.

But first, you have to understand progressives. What is it that progressives believe?

• Big government, power and control: It's not about Democrats or Republicans, people. It's power and control. You can't choose for yourself. You're too dumb, so progressives will choose and regulate everything for you

• Democratic elections: This is important to progressives. You'll hear it "democratically elected" to refer to leaders like Hitler, Chavez and Castro — all democratically elected

• Social justice: Collective redemption through the government: Call it socialism, Marxism, whatever — it's all about the redistribution of wealth

Now, I want to talk to you about Puerto Rico. Understand: This is not about Hispanics. It's not about freedom. It's about power and control.

Puerto Rico is a self-governing commonwealth, but is subject to U.S. jurisdiction and sovereignty. It's been a U.S. territory since after the Spanish-American War of 1898. They're not an independent country. It's similar to Guam, the Virgin Islands and American Samoa. Some people like it, others don't; they get to enjoy many of the benefits of America — like protection — and they don't have to pay any taxes. That's a pretty sweet deal.

So it's no wonder "the people" have consistently voted against becoming America's 51st state; three times since 1967 — the latest in 1998. It's always been the same question: Do you want to be a state?

Now, let's take you to Washington, where there's important vote happening: HR 2499 — it's called "The Puerto Rico Democracy Act." Gosh darn it, who could be against that? The bill is a non-binding resolution, supposedly to support Puerto Rico's "self-determination" on if they want to be a state or not.

That's so cute. Wait, I thought they already had a right to vote? They do. So I'm left with the question: Why do they need a non-binding resolution to support their self-determination? Is there something going on that I'm not aware of that is so important that we need to take attention away from the economy or immigration?

We've asked some of the Republicans in Congress who are supporting this bill and here are some of the answers:

"This is a vote about freedom."

"This vote does not grant Puerto Rico statehood, it simply gives Puerto Ricans the right to determine if statehood is something they want for themselves."

See, I thought they already had that. Three times they voted on that. It's almost like something else is going on. But remember, they keep telling me it's "non-binding."

If I just trusted progressives. With progressives, democratic elections always comes with a trick. For instance, Hitler was democratically elected. But as the chancellor, not the furor. Whether it be through parliamentary tricks or corruption, it's important to progressives to have the appearance of "the republic." Remember: They went through the democratic process for health care.

So what's the trick?

HR 2499 — if it passes — would force a yes or no vote in Puerto Rico on whether Puerto Rico should maintain the "current status" of the island. Wait, that's not a vote on statehood. That's a vote on do you want to "maintain the status quo."

Let me ask you this: Do you want to maintain the status quo of America? ACORN's Bertha Lewis would agree with me and say no, I don't want our current direction. But we would disagree on the reasons why.

See the trick?

In the past, statehood fails because some people like the status quo, some want to be a state and some want to be independent. There are too many choices, too many options. They need to unite people. Do you want to maintain the status quo unites them, not on the answer but on the question.

See, the folks that like the status quo are more likely to vote for statehood than independence.

In 1998, there were five options on the ballot: Limited self-government; free association; statehood; sovereignty and none of the above. Which one won? None of the above.

But now, the vote is going to happen in two stages. The first stage: Do you want to maintain the status quo? Then a chair is removed. The second vote leaves you with three choices: statehood; full independence or modified commonwealth.

Remember, full independence and modified commonwealth historically get less than 3 percent of the vote. So those options will be the only thing standing in the way of Puerto Rico becoming a state.

But Glenn, it's non-binding. Big deal!

True, but here's where if you don't know history, you are destined to repeat it. Let me introduce something to you called the Tennessee Plan. (This is probably going to sound like a conspiracy theory, but I have one thing the conspiracy theories never have.)

OK — so the Tennessee Plan, you've probably never heard of it unless you are from Tennessee or Alaska. Apparently, some of those who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution haven't heard of it either. When Tennessee first came to the Union, it had a different name; it was first called "Territory of the United States South of the River Ohio." It was a U.S. territory, just like Puerto Rico is now.

But instead of waiting for Congress to decide if they wanted to make the territory a state, they took a different, bold route: They forced the issue themselves:

• They elected delegates for Congress

• They voted on statehood

• They drafted a state constitution

• And applied for statehood

• Then, when Congress dragged their feet, they went to the Capitol and demanded to be seated

Congress was unsure of how to proceed; this was the first territory going for statehood. They relented and Tennessee became America's 16th state. Alaska did many of the same things.

Again, the Tennessee plan in a nutshell:

• Unsuccessfully petitioning Congress for admission

• Drafting a state constitution without prior congressional intervention

• Holding state elections for state officers, U.S. senators and representatives

• In some cases, sending the entire congressional delegation to Washington to demand statehood and claim their seats

• Finally, Congress has little choice but to admit a new state through the passage of a simple act of admission

Congressmen, voting for HR 2499 are like sheep being led to slaughter. They'll say the people of Puerto Rico have a right to vote for themselves. They'll vote yes. The progressives will then present a false choice to the people. Instead of saying "do you want to be a state?"it's "Do you want the status quo?" If voters vote no, the next vote removes the status quo from the ballot, leaving statehood against two far less popular options. They'll vote yes for statehood. Then they'll elect their congressman and senators, they'll demand to be seated and a 51st star will be attached to the flag.

How could this happen? Look at the immigration debate. What are Arizona and Texas being called? Racists. Anyone opposing Puerto Rico as state 51 would be called a hatemonger. Why do you hate Puerto Ricans so much? Why do you hate freedom?

This is not about Hispanics or freedom or sovereignty. It's about power and control. If progressives convince Hispanics that everyone besides progressives are racist, you'll have their vote for 60 years. But it's more than that.

Why are Democrats and Republicans for this? Because it's not about Republicans and Democrats. The progressives in our country know that this is the moment they've been waiting for; every Marxist daydream they've ever had, now is their time to get it done. They are not going to let it pass.

That's what's happening: The fundamental transformation of America. And this is only the beginning.

I told that this sounds like a conspiracy theory. But who is orchestrating this effort in Puerto Rico? Lo and behold, the New Progressive Party; from their own party platform:

"The New Progressive Party adopts the Tennessee Plan as an additional strategy for the decolonization and the claim for the admission of Puerto Rico as the 51st State of the United States of America."

And: "This shall be done through legislation which will establish a process for the adoption and ratification of the Constitution of the State of Puerto Rico, and the election of two senators and six federal congresspersons to appear before Congress in Washington D.C. to claim their seats and the admission of Puerto Rico as the 51st State of the United States of America."

They're going to paint this as a vote for freedom, but Puerto Rico has already voted and they've already spoken. When they send the delegates to Washington, if you stand against this you'll be labeled a racist.

[Ptarmigan]

Originally Posted by robertt

This is happening this afternoon, (29th), bet you haven't heard about this. I KNOW it's long but WELL worth reading. I KNOW it's Glenn Beck but........

Puerto Rican Statehood Ahead?
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
By Glenn Beck

I don't mind that it's from Beck, but his facts are wrong in several instances.

I want to talk to you about the fundamental transformation of America. It could happen tomorrow.

But first, you have to understand progressives. What is it that progressives believe?

I don't really want to hear from Beck about what someone else believes. I'd much rather hear it from the someone else.

• Big government, power and control: It's not about Democrats or Republicans, people. It's power and control. You can't choose for yourself. You're too dumb, so progressives will choose and regulate everything for you

This is why.

• Democratic elections: This is important to progressives. You'll hear it "democratically elected" to refer to leaders like Hitler, Chavez and Castro — all democratically elected

Hitler was not democratically elected in any semblance of the word. It's a common tactic, to claim that Hitler was democratically elected, thus suggesting by implication that other democratically elected people are bad.

• Social justice: Collective redemption through the government: Call it socialism, Marxism, whatever — it's all about the redistribution of wealth

That's not what social justice means by any interpretation of the concept. Social Justice is a core principle of two of the three largest Christian denominations in the United States.

Now, I want to talk to you about Puerto Rico. Understand: This is not about Hispanics. It's not about freedom. It's about power and control.

Right, so before Beck even begins his argument, he invites his reader to draw a conclusion. Beck's a smart (ish) guy, he knows that his point is going to be much more warmly received by a reader who has already been told what to think. I am sure we'll see some evidence in Beck's article to back up the conclusion he has already drawn.

Puerto Rico is a self-governing commonwealth, but is subject to U.S. jurisdiction and sovereignty. It's been a U.S. territory since after the Spanish-American War of 1898. They're not an independent country. It's similar to Guam, the Virgin Islands and American Samoa. Some people like it, others don't; they get to enjoy many of the benefits of America — like protection — and they don't have to pay any taxes. That's a pretty sweet deal.

Not completely true. They do get to enjoy many of the benefits available to Americans, like protection, although protection from whom is a key question. Incidentally, there are five medal of honor winners from Puerto Rico, and Puerto Ricans are the most highly decorated Hispanics in the United States Military.

Now, Beck claims that they do not have to pay any taxes. This is completely untrue. Puerto Ricans pay a myriad of taxes, social security taxes, payroll takes, import and export taxes. They are exempt from federal income taxes. That's it. The income level on the island is sufficiently low that most residents would not pay taxes anyway.

So it's no wonder "the people" have consistently voted against becoming America's 51st state; three times since 1967 — the latest in 1998. It's always been the same question: Do you want to be a state?

In 1967, 39% of Puerto Ricans voted for statehood, In 1993 that had risen to 46.3% and in 1998 46.5% voted for statehood. In 2010 or 2011, that number may be greater.

Now, let's take you to Washington, where there's important vote happening: HR 2499 — it's called "The Puerto Rico Democracy Act." Gosh darn it, who could be against that? The bill is a non-binding resolution, supposedly to support Puerto Rico's "self-determination" on if they want to be a state or not.

That's really scary. It's almost identical to the bill passed before Alaska's statehood. If only we had payed close attention, we wouldn't have to hear from that awful Palin woman.

That's so cute. Wait, I thought they already had a right to vote? They do. So I'm left with the question: Why do they need a non-binding resolution to support their self-determination? Is there something going on that I'm not aware of that is so important that we need to take attention away from the economy or immigration?

Actually they don't have the same rights to vote as the US does.

See, I thought they already had that. Three times they voted on that. It's almost like something else is going on. But remember, they keep telling me it's "non-binding."

It is. It authorizes but not requires Puerto Rico to hold a plebiscite.

If I just trusted progressives. With progressives, democratic elections always comes with a trick. For instance, Hitler was democratically elected. But as the chancellor, not the furor. Whether it be through parliamentary tricks or corruption, it's important to progressives to have the appearance of "the republic." Remember: They went through the democratic process for health care.

This part is just plain factually wrong. Hitler was not elected as Chancellor. He was appointed. He lost the election to Hindenberg, and was appointed Chancellor in 1933 by Hindenberg. When Hindenberg died, the German Cabinet appointed Hitler as Fuhrer, (not furor as Beck claims)

HR 2499 — if it passes — would force a yes or no vote in Puerto Rico on whether Puerto Rico should maintain the "current status" of the island. Wait, that's not a vote on statehood. That's a vote on do you want to "maintain the status quo."

The text of the bill is:

(a) First Plebiscite- The Government of Puerto Rico is authorized to conduct a plebiscite in Puerto Rico. The 2 options set forth on the ballot shall be preceded by the following statement: ‘Instructions: Mark one of the following 2 options:

‘(1) Puerto Rico should continue to have its present form of political status. If you agree, mark here XX.

‘(2) Puerto Rico should have a different political status. If you agree, mark here XX.’.

It says nothing about the Status Quo. Beck is attempting to portray the bill as something that it is not. If the majority favor option 1, which is what has happened in the past, no second vote takes place. It is only if the majority favors option 2 that an additional vote takes place. All this bill does is split the questions, the five options, across two ballots in the same way that a runoff election happens in a primary where no one candidate gains a simple majority.

It's all non binding because a state cannot admit itself to the Union.

Beck further claims that the three options on the second ballot are:

statehood; full independence or modified commonwealth.

That's actually not true. The three options are:

c) Procedure if Majority in First Plebiscite Favors Option 2- If a majority of the ballots in a plebiscite conducted pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) are cast in favor of Option 2, the Government of Puerto Rico is authorized to conduct a plebiscite on the following 3 options:

(1) Independence: Puerto Rico should become fully independent from the United States. If you agree, mark here XX.

(2) Sovereignty in Association with the United States: Puerto Rico and the United States should form a political association between sovereign nations that will not be subject to the Territorial Clause of the United States Constitution. If you agree, mark here XX.

(3) Statehood: Puerto Rico should be admitted as a State of the Union. If you agree, mark here XX.

Beck attempts to make out that something sinister is afoot. The 1998 Ballot gave the following options:

Commonwealth: 0.6%
Independent Nation with Free Association: 0.3%
Statehood: 46.5%
Independent Nation: 2.5%
None of the above (commonwealth): 50.3%[2]

Lets see, none of the above, is the same thing as maintain the current political status of the Island. 50.3% voted for this. So assuming the same numbers hold, option 1 on the first Ballot wins, and there is no second Ballot.

The rest is Beck predicting the future, and I don't put much credence in that.

[robertt]

House Approves Puerto Rico Statehood Measure
By John Brandt Chad Pergram
- FOXNews.com

The House voted Thursday to allow Puerto Ricans to decide their own political future and relationship with the United States.

A demonstrator marches under a Puerto Rican flag in San Juan Oct. 15, 2009. (AP Photo)
The House voted Thursday to allow Puerto Ricans to decide their own political future and relationship with the United States.

The bill passed 223-169 and now must be taken up by the Senate.

The bill introduced a two-step ballot measure for Puerto Rico to decide if its residents want to change their current relationship with the United States. If they vote to change their status, they can then choose to become a state, pursue independence, or seek some other "political association between sovereign nations." ‬‪ ‬‪

Puerto Rico became a U.S. territory at the end of the Spanish-American War. Those born on the island were granted U.S. citizenship in 1917 and Puerto Rico gained commonwealth status in 1952.

Today, Puerto Ricans serve in the military but can't vote in presidential elections. They do not pay federal income tax on income earned on the island.

Proponents say the measure gives citizens of the island the right to self-determination.‬‪ ‬‪Critics say the measure is a device to impose statehood on a population that doesn't want it.‬‪ ‬‪Thursday's action was nonbinding, and if Puerto Ricans eventually select statehood, Congress would still have to vote to admit the island to the union as the 51st state.‬‪ ‬‪

The issue divided Democrats and Republicans alike as liberal Democrats with ties to Puerto Rico teamed with conservative Republicans to oppose the measure.

The divides were particularly stark among members of the House Republican leadership team. House Minority Leader John Boehner,R-Ohio, voted against the legislation. Meantime, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence, R-Ind., voted in favor.

Puerto Rico Gov. Luis Fortuno (R) cobbled together more than 50 Republican sponsors in favor of the package.

But there was drama as the majority Democrats narrowly avoided an upset on the House floor.

Republicans attempted to add provisions to the legislation that would have made English the official language of a potential Puerto Rican state.

Republicans also tried to modify the bill by banning any infringement of the Second Amendment in Puerto Rico.

The Democratic majority defeated the GOP effort, 198-194.

[golfhobo]

Actually, robertt.... I DID hear about "this" cuz I listen to FOX, CNN and now MSNBC on my XM radio for about 6 or 7 hours a day while driving every day.

Wondering why you were so appologetic about quoting Beck? He WAS mostly wrong and disinformative as usual... but, aren't you a big FAN of his?

I'll admit I was surprised to hear about it, with so little "run up" to it... but, that's the way Washington works. I haven't read enough about it, except the FACTS that ptarmigan supplied, to know just what the "angle" is yet.... but, I THINK I'm getting there.

IF this should lead to some "quick" vote and "admittance" of the 51st state, I will be surprised but not misinformed.

Just off the cuff, on first blush....

It looks like a majority of PR's would vote TODAY for statehood, cuz they are hurting like the rest of us, and they need our help. THEY want and need "representation" in the Congress that has so much power over their "commonwealth" and they seem prepared to accept the "federal tax" tradeoff.

As somone said, MOST of the "middle and lower class" of PR would be exempt from same due to low income. However.... I HOPE they would "scale" this to be proportionate to OUR income cutoffs. But... there IS a "privileged" class in PR with lots of money! And.... more importantly.... I think some of the intent is to tax the corporations over there. Hey... we NEED the money! :thumbsup:

Now.... is this a Democratic (Obama) plot to "include" more hispanic and favorable VOTES before the next TWO elections? Probably.

Is there a reason why our Congress would be AGAINST PR becoming a state? Maybe.

THIS bill simply removes any objection on the part of the U.S. to PR "replicating" the Tennessee model IF they want to become a state. This would force THEM to "gear up" electionwise to have a system in place, and present delegates, with which to seamlessly "merge" into our current political system.

There is NO chance that any "territory" could today FORCE themselves into the United States. Tennessee was LUCKY.... and they weren't the ONLY "territories" that were trying to get IN!

But, I'm thinking THEY want in.... and WE could use the taxes! And really..... what is the difference? PR's have been pretty much like the rest of us all my life!

I'm sure SOMEONE will call this a "socialist takeover" of one of our "protected" FREE commonwealths! :roll::hellno:

I call it Social Justice (lol) and perhaps, financial reality! But, mostly.... it is probably just Political reality! This question and debate has been going on for years! I wouldn't mind seeing it FINALIZED once and for all! I don't think the OUTCOME was ever in doubt.

BTW... I agree with (almost) everything ptarmigan said! See what I MEAN, Twilight??? I don't have TIME to fight all these fights! ptarmigan appears to be on hiatus, or just glued to his computer every day researching all these cases (and many more) in his legal "studies."

Thanks to him, we now have some FACTS about this resolution in congress. If a conversation is to be had.... let it be based on reality.

[repete]

This is just another Obama White house socialistic take over of a free people in a free commonwealth!

There Hobo i said it, didn't want to disappoint you.
In all honesty I know little about this but do feel that they (P.R.) has been getting the benefits of statehood with out the cost for long enough = sign up or go out on your own!