Arizona Candidate's English Under Challenge

wrenchwench1/27/2012 4:46:10 pm PST

re: #8 tacuba14

This really caught my attention because I lived in Central America a few years where I did learn Spanish. I have a mixed opinion. It’s clear this is not an ‘accent’ issue, her comprehension/speaking is extremely poor. Click here to hear her

In the video she is on the stand with her lawyer. The first question is “Where did you go to high school?” She responds “1986.” Her lawyer responds with more emphasis, “Where at?” She responds “1983.” Followed by, “I asked you where did you go to high school?” She responds “Yes, after high school I went to college.” The judge then asks her to step down. She really gets hung up on the word “where” mistaking it for “when.”

So with that said it’s unfair to sake of the argument to say this is an accent issue. On the other hand, the town is 95+% Spanish speaking, English could be considered superfluous. So I leave it to the city council to make the call. If they conduct all their city business in English then it might be an issue. If Spanish, there is absolutely no reason she should be required to pass any kind of proficiency testing.

Her English isn’t great, but neither is that of the mayor and current council members.

So I leave it to the city council to make the call.

Those are the people she would oppose in an election. They should not be allowed to decide who can run against them.

The judge who ordered her to be examined by an ‘expert’ said he made up his mind in 30 seconds. Mrs. Cabrera said she was nervous, and also:

She went to a hearing specialist in an effort to show that auditory problems were also an issue.

That’s from the first article. Should hearing impaired people not be allowed to run or serve?

State law says government business has to be conducted in English, and office holders need to be able to participate without a translator. That law should be changed. But it’s Arizona, so I’m not going to hold my breath. I’m guessing they need to provide interpreters for the hearing impaired, which would mean it’s discriminatory not to provide them for everyone who needs them.