Talk:Raúl Labrador/Archive 1

Archive 1

more from his own bio if anyone wants to add to page

Raúl Rafael Labrador was born on December 8, 1967 in Carolina, Puerto Rico.

As the only child of a single mother, Raúl’s home was humble, but it was always a place of encouragement and love. His mother worked many different jobs to make ends meet, ultimately relocating their small family to Las Vegas, Nevada, where she worked in the booming hospitality industry.

Though times were tough, Raúl’s mother often reminded him that if he studied, worked hard, and receive a professional education, he could achieve his American Dream. She even led by example, ultimately earning her degree in education while working full-time, and later, becoming a teacher. This encouraged Raúl to never give up on his own professional aspirations and personal dreams.

In 1985, Raúl graduated from Las Vegas High School. After graduation, he enrolled in Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. From 1987 to 1989, he served a mission for the LDS Church in Santiago, Chile. After his mission, he returned to BYU where he met Rebecca Johnson, and they married on June 28, 1991 in Las Vegas. In 1992, Raúl graduated with a degree in Spanish with an emphasis in Latin American Literature. Raúl later earned his law degree from the University of Washington, School of Law in Seattle, Washington, in 1995.

Raúl and his family moved to his wife’s native Idaho, and the young attorney established a successful law practice with offices in both Nampa and Boise. As a small business owner, Raúl had to balance a budget, make payroll, and manage employees. Owning his own business was an important part of Raúl achieving the American Dream and creating a better life for his children.

Inspired by a desire to serve his fellow citizens, Raúl ran for the Idaho House of Representatives in 2006. During his tenure as the state representative from District 14B, Raúl was known by his colleagues and constituents as a steadfast advocate for free markets, limited government and civil liberties.

After decades of watching politicians in Washington, D.C. grow government to unprecedented and dangerous levels, Raúl again felt a duty to serve his fellow Idahoans---this time on Capitol Hill. To the surprise of many political pundits and members of the media, Raúl defeated his primary opponent and the incumbent Congressman, both of whom outspent him significantly. He was sworn in as a member of the 112th Congress on Tuesday, January 4, 2011, with his family by his side.

Today, Raúl Labrador is proud to represent Idaho’s First Congressional District, which spans the western half of Idaho from Canada in the north and Nevada in the south. Raúl has stood for Idaho’s values and for America’s future. He has fought for tax reform, fiscal responsibility, regulatory restraint, increased domestic energy production, transparency in government and the protection of civil liberties. He was noted by Idaho and national press as the architect of the Balanced Budget Amendment vote in the debt ceiling negations of 2011.

Raúl is honored to serve on the House Committee on Natural Resources and the House Committee on the Judiciary. In 2012, his first piece of legislation passed the U.S. House of Representatives with a bipartisan majority If enacted, this bill would ease regulations on the geothermal energy industry, expanding affordable access to energy for Idahoans.

Lauded as one of the “rising stars” of the Republican Party, Raúl has earned a 100 percent rating from both the Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity. He also won the “spirit of Enterprise Award” from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for this dedication to America’s job creators.

In February 2012, Raul announced he would seek a second term as the Representative from Idaho’s First Congressional District. In May of 2012, he won his party’s nomination with 81% percent of the vote!

In addition to his public service, Raúl ’s primary interest is spending time with his family. He and Rebecca Johnson Labrador have been married for more than 20 years and together have five children: Michael, Katerina, Joshua, Diego, and Rafael. Their family is active in their church and community of Eagle, Idaho.

source http://labrador.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=63 YakbutterT (talk) 21:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moot - move done as uncontroversial which is fair given that the editor that moved it the other way agrees with moving it back. Dpmuk (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

---

Raul Labrador → Raúl Labrador — Redirect of Raúl Labrador leads to Raul Labrador, which shows his name as Raúl Labrador. 75.204.148.101 (talk) 00:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. I was the editor who moved it from Raúl Labrador about a week ago, because all of the references (including his campaign site) omitted the accent. However, his new US House of Representatives site does use the accent. Regardless of any other reliable source usage, an individual's official website is the definitive source for the spelling of his or her name. Horologium (talk) 01:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Raul Labrador's actions via Obamacare

It's clear watching Rep Labrador doing many recent television interviews that he is playing a key role in shutting down the federal government and rallying other Republicans in the house to fight against the Affordable Care Act. I came here just trying to find out more info and its a little disappointing with how thin this entry is especially concerning his recent actions. Clearly this article is being worked on but reads more like a fluff piece than a well developed entry. What gives? --Lumpytrout (talk) 20:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. It reads mostly like a brochure for Labrador.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

What Labrador is nationally known for...

is his infamous comment Nobody dies because they don’t have access to health care -- Labrador said that, just like Marie Antoinette said let them eat cake -- Labrador's comment got picked up by most national news publications -- and it is important and it needs to be in the lede paragraph and it should not be buried in the article with all the rest of the non-important junk like committee assignments by pro-Labrador supporters. The Newsmax comment about influential Latio congresspersons is highly dubious -- what is Newsmax (I've never heard of it before) and to put their non-assessment (top 50? puh-leeze) in the lede paragraph is spam on a stick.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:06, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

You can find an entry on Newsmax in Wikipedia. It is a right wing political publication that has run a number of stories of dubious veracity, but is very popular in Tea Party circles. Joalkap (talk) 02:26, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I moved the Newsmax award to its own sub section "awards". I agree that the page shouldn't lead with that. Has for having awards on Labrador's page I don't see an issue with it since most of the politicians articles I have seen on here (local and national politicians) mention awards they have won wither its the ACLU to The Heritage Foundation (Calling this spam really?).

I am confused how having committee assignments on a biographical page about a US Congressman being "pro-Labrador" has all members of Congress have this on their page. Would you consider that "pro" information for the other members of congress has well?

The committee assignments are fine, but the general tone of the article, aside from a few instances in which the "Nobody died..." comment appears, is almost entirely positive and pro-Labrador, like it's so easy to tell that the writers are advocating for pro-Labrador positions. Like, you could lift most of this "article" and clip it into a campaign brochure entitled Labrador for Congress. What has happened is that the "Nobody died..." comment has struck a deep nerve in the national psyche, since it captures, perfectly, succinctly, the GOP's ignorance and heartlessness when it comes to the subject of health care. It is almost as if the Labrador article should become a Redirect page, pointing to a new article just about the infamous comment, entitled, "Nobody died...".--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Has for the "buried" comment I think it is reasonable to leave it in the issue section, has it is an issue statement . Where I might add states that he received national attention for the comment. IdahoSolo (talk) 18:34, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Check out the pageviews for this article. Last time I looked, 6000 -- in one day. What are these people wanting to learn about? Labrador's Latino heritage? His committee positions? NO -- his comment. That's the BIG BIG STORY and anybody reading this article, who doesn't see the "Nobody died..." comment, will see this article as pro-GOP, biased, and they'll roll their eyes at the idea of Wikipedia being objective, and they'll think contributors here are pro-GOP hacks. Trust me, there's lots of attention to this article now, and it will CONTINUE for the next two years, as every political ad-writer for the opposition harps on this comment.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:27, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree, this was a noteworthy event that belongs at the top. I am beginning to wonder if this was SPA removing this. H McCringleberry (talk) 21:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I think we would all agree that it would be wise to get a consensus before removing important content from this page. thanks. H McCringleberry (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

For saying this page is written by "GOP-Hacks" is laughable since it reads like every other member of the house and senate on here. (majority of sources are from his voting record on here, has are other members of Congress has well...)IdahoSolo (talk) 22:35, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

While the comment was certainly controversial and widely discussed at the time, the comment no longer seems to be what Labrador is "known" for. Just googling his name brings up news feeds about his participation in the governors race. Putting the most controversial thing about Labrador in the lede makes it look like an attempt to make Labrador look worse. I find it interesting multiple users have moved the controversial comment to the Issues section where it belongs, yet a single user has been reverting those edits for months. Yhbn84 (talk) 23:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Labrador said Nobody dies because they don't have access to health care -- a lawmaker said that -- a supposed lawmaker --it was and continues to be huge news and yes it is what Labrador is known nationally and internationally for. It belongs in the lede section.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 02:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

It's clear that you feel strongly about this man and the GOP, but repeating "this is what Labrador is known for" over and over again and putting it in bold doesn't make it true. The point it that it does not "continue to be huge news" as all the sources about the comment are from May when the comment made. Perhaps the comment being in the lede in May was appropriate, but now all the news about Labrador is talking about his race for governor, not his comment. Yhbn84 (talk) 17:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Google "Raul Labrador" in quotes. What comes up again and again is his 'no one dies' comment.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

If you look at the news feeds, it's all news from his governors race. All the articles that come up about his comment are from May, the talk dies down after that. How long do you want this comment to stay in the lede? Two years? Five? The rest of his life? Obviously the comment and the negative attention he received for it should be mentioned in the issues section. But for all the talk of "pro-GOP bias" in the article, there's no reason to go the opposite direction and make the most controversial thing about Labrador the first thing people see. Especially when there are other things Labrador is known for, like being in the Freedom Caucus and Liberty Caucus, and running for governor. Yhbn84 (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok to include a line about the governor's race in the lede section but omitting the Nobody dies there makes Wikipedia look amateurish like it's PR for a political candidate. When people think 'Labrador' they think 'Nobody dies', like peanut butter and jelly; omitting the 'Nobody dies' is an incomplete sandwich.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:31, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Whether, "When people think 'Labrador' they think 'Nobody dies'" is the question. I think it's not true because all of the sources talking about the comment are from May. Given that he made the comment almost half a year ago, it seems more appropriate to mention the comment in the Issues section. If you think the comment still belongs in the lede after a few months, when do you think it should be taken out? Yhbn84 (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

True, the sources were from May, but the query is in August, and the Nobody dies comment comes up again and again in headlines about Labrador. What Google is saying is that that is what Labrador is notable for. I go by the sources. If, in 6 months, say, if we google Labrador and the 'nobody dies' doesn't come up, then yes we can remove it from the lede section. My sense is, however, that this is a defining comment -- it's what the world thinks of Labrador and the GOP: uncaring, insensitive, using non-logic to push Americans away from health care.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Ethnicity in lead sentence

I usually don't change this when the subject was not born in the US but in this case I did. What do others think? Thank you, --Malerooster (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)