Don’t say it doesn’t exist. See it with your own 2 eyes. What amazes me is that some people feel this is an ok way to talk in public. We all know of people who say things like this in private, but public? Is that what makes this so different?
Most people don’t feel many of these behaviors are appropriate. Was John Murtha right or was he out of line? He said that Western Pennsylvania was a racist area. Then he backed off a bit, and said that some of the older people were.
Should we expect Prince William to have this kind of performance tomorrow? Absolutely not. Prince William County, despite our rather tumultuous past year, is better than this!
America has a ways to go, it seems. A long way to go. Seeing something like this sort of leaves a person speechless.
[Disclaimer: This activity was outside and NOT part of any inside rally. The behavior was not condoned by Governor Palin.]
Oh good lord. That is so gross. I heard political concerns in there that got mixed up in people’s own prejudices. They egged each other on.
Let’s talk about the trickle down effect of adult prejudice based on race, ethnicity, or religion in this country. Children are listening and some of this is rubbing off on them. I believe I saw some younger people in the video, too.
I know of several recent cases in which elementary-aged students excluded a child because of their color…and in these cases the children said, “I don’t want to play with you because you are brown/I can’t be friends with brown people/My parents say I am not allowed to learn any Spanish/My parents don’t like black people, etc.” The list of comments goes on…and this is from a couple of schools in a large suburban and diverse area. Imagine what the comments are across the nation.
Children notice differences, and it is developmentally appropriate to be curious about those differences. Discriminating based on those differences is quite another matter, though. However, it amazes me that when they say things like this, 99% of the time their parents say they have no clue where their children would come up ideas like this. Am I totally wrong in thinking that (in many, but not all cases) kids are picking up on the attitudes of their families?
I was drawn into the immigration debate because of this type of stereotyping, hatred, public abuse. Except, for me, it wasn’t at a campaign rally – it was after reading BVBL. I grew up in the 50s/60s South so I had heard much of this anger before when it was aimed at African Americans. Over the years I’d moved to the DC metro area and much of that ugly display of racism had faded from public view. It was the fact that trash like this could be aimed at Hispanics that compelled me to publically oppose the hate mongers among my fellow PWC (and cities) residents. But now it’s obvious that racism again needs to condemned as well.
There are too many scared people out there looking for scapegoats. I’m not talking about the people wielding the cameras or Obama signs at McCain rallies either. They may be the ones who are on the receiving end of the invectives, but the really scared ones are the ones who have led a privileged life because of their race and are afraid that when they have to compete on an equal footing with everyone else, they’ll lose. The economy is tough and it’s no longer enough just to be white.
The thuggery isn’t just at the rallies either but in the move to disenfranchise segments of the voting population.
What you willingly ignore is the hatred exercised by the left. Have you heard some of the stuff being said about Palin? Check out Sandra Bernhard’s little rant about it. I’m not going to get too deeply into it, it’s a waste of time, but for every one of these you find (and you’ll find them), I can show you two examples from the other side. But you choose to be blind to that. Anti-BVBL is nothing but future Washington Post / MJM reporters in training.
Slowpoke, I exclude what politicians, celebrities, or pundits have to say since they have a political or financial gain at stake. They already provide plenty of fodder as well as take advantage of it. What we’re commenting on are the public actions and words of common people out there.
I’m chuckling at your last comment. 😉
Slowpoke R, I am not sure that your average ‘liberal’ would feel comfortable saying the opposite things in public. I am also not sure who you would consider to be a liberal. Colin Powell? Bill O’Reilly? I haven’t see any footage of extreme liberal misbehavior. I will be glad to look though. Liberals can be jerks too.
Michelle Malkin has a couple of compilations of extreme hatred coming from Obama supporters. If you need video, just tape “The View”.
Censored. How utterly convenient. “I’ll just disqualify everything other than this video on arbitrary terms”. Dude, I could win EVERY debate if I could play by those rules. I exclude any comment from Censored bybvbl because they’re biased. Cool! I win!
The View gets paid to be what it is. Again, Hollywood doesn’t count. Where is the spontaneous ‘going to a rally’ footage? I am not saying it doesn’t exist. I am saying I haven’t seen it.
I will pit The View against Hannity or Limbough any time. All 3 are filled with loudmouths and ugly.
How utterly convenient of you to twist what I’ve said. That video is hardly the only example of thuggery out there. I thought we were discussing how the level of discourse had declined among citizens as opposed to the pols who egg them on, the pundits who comment on the pols, and the celebrities who cash in on the antics of the pols.
If you have kiddos, how would you feel about taking them to the McCain rally if they were going to be exposed to this behavior? Would you say anything to the bigots if they continually screamed these types of comments in your children’s or any child’s presence?
It’s silly to claim there is some sort of parallel hatred in order to justify hatred. Think about that. Slow, you want McCain to win so badly you are hiping for hatred.
These hate testimonies didn’t come along until Palin and McCain started playing to the emotions that engender hate: fear, resentment, disdain for cultural differences. “Not like us,” “thinks America is so imperfect to hang around with terrorists,” “Acorn is destriying life as we know it.”
The people who believed the more overt hate campaigns see this and say “oh I guess hate is in now” and the start mirroring their leaders (with their own limits to what is an acceptable level of bigotry to show in public instead of a politically motivated level).
Slow you have no argument here. The best thing you could say to help McCain is “I condemn that behavior.”
“Should we expect Prince William to have this kind of performance tomorrow? Absolutely not. Prince William County, despite our rather tumultuous past year, is better than this!”
I completely agree.
” If you have kiddos, how would you feel about taking them to the McCain rally if they were going to be exposed to this behavior? Would you say anything to the bigots if they continually screamed these types of comments in your children’s or any child’s presence?”
As I have stated in this forum, I am a conservative Republican who is voting for McCain. I will be at the rally today…and I give you my word that if I see this type of behavior, not only will I condemn it out loud, I will come back here and post about it.
We all know there are fringe elements on both sides of the political spectrum. Those people are the real enemies of freedom and democracy. Those are our enemies.
Without question, the level of discourse must be raised. It is incumbent upon us, as people of good will and intellectual honesty, to do our best in that vein. To that end, I urge the owners of this forum to find video examples of hard left hatred, and post them here. We must all be educated and enlightened. We must know our enemies the better to defeat them.
(Incidentally, my spouse – who is a liberal Democrat voting for Obama – said “You better hope Corey isn’t at the rally. McCain won’t get a word in edgewise.” LOL)
Dear God. That was really disturbing. Worse than anything we’ve seen in PWC. Jesus. The crowd was worse than Help Save Manassas EVER was. Here is just another example of why Prince William is not unique in America. We are not unique at all. You can always find people like this in every pocket of America. I’ll bet there are more of them in the North than the South.
The problem is when public officials and candidates call them to arms. That’s where it becomes truly frightening (Corey Stewart).
Let’s hope people behave themselves today at the McCoart building.
Fontbonne, I am not the owner of the blog but I did try to find footage that showed comparable behavior from Obama supporters. I could not find such footage. If you have a suggestion, please leave it here for me and I will consider another thread or part 2. To be fair, I think the footage should show average people attending a political rally.
Enjoy the rally. We certainly have been blessed with attention from all the candidates. For once, I feel like my vote means something. And thanks for your promise. I think MOST democrats, republicans and independents are good and decent people.
MH, people tend to be decent until they start talking about politics 🙂
Fontbonne,
I hope that you don’t see this behavior, but if you do, you should be prepared to be put down if you openly condemn it. These people are virulent in their hate. It is VERY VERY disturbing. People may make fun of Palin and talk about McCains’ age, but there IS nothing that remotely compares to the level of hate expressed by my fellow citizens in this tape.
“It was the fact that trash like this could be aimed at Hispanics that compelled me to publically oppose the hate mongers among my fellow PWC (and cities) residents.”
Well Censored…what about thrash like this from the founder of La Raza?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSmNEupHWjs
Excuse me, but of course I mean trash, not “thrash.” Must have been a Freudian slip.
There are all sorts of scary groups out there. I don’t find this one any scarier than some others I have encountered in my life. A KKK rally is a pretty scary thing to witness, just to offer up an example. Some of the North American plains Indians have some pretty scary rhetoric. A lot of them hate white people.
Do I approve of what Gutierrez said? No. He is an ass. One of many. I don’t react to every ass who comes down the pike.
I do not think this man is associated with NCLR.
AWCheney, I never paid an iota of attention to La Raza and only did minimal research on it after reading BVBL. Does it have a BOCS member or a Manassas City Council member in its group? Have they petitioned the BOCS and had a resolution enacted in PWC? I thought not. We can play “let’s name a fringe group” forever. I’m talking about average citizens. Did you approve of the discourse by “average citizens” on BVBL?
Moon-howler, look into La Raza (and it IS the NCLR). They are considered the mainstream group representing the Hispanic issue; they get a combination of public and private financing from government grants and grants from such foundations as Ford, Chrysler, Microsoft Corp. (Bill Gates is a big supporter) and a multitude of others (including a number of companies that recently got bailed out, like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), as well as individuals, in the BILLIONS of dollars; they have opened schools all around the country where they are teaching Professor Gutierrez’ party line to young Hispanic children, much as Hamas does. I find it interesting that you equate them with the KKK, Moon-howler. You’re right, of course…but if I had said it I’d be accused of being a right-wing racist.
In any group you can always find idiots, but they aren’t necessarily representative of the group. The people on this video are just a bunch of idiots. Their behavior, as offensive at it is, shouldn’t be used to draw a conclusion of all Republicans.
Censored, you speak of the 50’s and 60’s in the South (and it was NOT only in the South) and the hatred generated against blacks (which was nationally organized hatred and fear), yet you can’t equate another national organization generating the same thing to what we are experiencing today? The difference being, of course, that the vast majority generating and perpetuating that hate are not “average citizens”…they aren’t even citizens at all, yet they lay claim to this country as their own, demanding the supplanting of those “average citizens.” How, I ask you, can that NOT create fear and concern among the average citizens of this country?
Hey gang!
Back from the rally and I must tell you it was very, very energizing. Excellent turnout, children and families, older folks, teenagers, you name it. Ethnically diverse, as well. Everyone very friendly and civilized. There were some chants of NO-BA-MA – in which I did not participate – but that was about it.
And I did not cheer when they announced Corey’s name. After all, one must have standards.
” For once, I feel like my vote means something”
Though I do take your meaning, I must encourage you never to give up on democracy. Your vote always, always means something. We in this country enjoy a privilege that many over the world do not…though our chosen candidate may not prevail, we have the freedom, we have the choice. That is a powerful, powerful thing.
“there IS nothing that remotely compares to the level of hate expressed by my fellow citizens in this tape.”
With your consent, I will post some links to material which is pretty disturbing. \
“you should be prepared to be put down if you openly condemn it.”
I’m from Newark, NJ. Water off a duck’s back. 🙂
AWC aren’t you being a bit intellectually dishonest to say that any person or any group represents Hispanic people. Shouldn’t you at least let a Hispanic person make such a proclamation, although that would only be slightly less presumptuous.
What so people think they are gaining by saying any one community is represented by someone they despise? Is this a way to make people despise an entire community? If that’s the goal, who THINKS like that?
I do believe that you need to clarify your point, Shelly. What I said was that “They (La Raza) are CONSIDERED the mainstream group representing the Hispanic issue…” Now, if you can offer a quote out of my above comments supporting your assumption, perhaps I may be able to address it with what you might consider intellectual honesty.
Yep, that was an embarrassing example of Americans acting badly! Say what you will about PWC, but if those folks had been here during the MWB parades I sort of think things would have gotten ugly. I don’t know what the Obama supporters were shouting, but it was probably along the same lines. This video was meant to focus on the others of course.
Okay. In all honesty, what do you seek to gain by connecting “the Hispanic issue” (whatever that means) using a word like “considered” to La Raza? I know a lot of Hispanic people but none have ever mentioned these folks. I have my doubts about the way you are characterizing them because it’s part of a pattern I’ve seen all too often in my life.
But that said, the only people I hear bringing up La Raza are non-Hispanic, and, usually quite ready to prejudge or dislike Hispanics. I’m sure you’ll say this is not you, AWC. That’s why I am curious about what other purpose making this connection would serve.
Oh for God’s sake, National Council of La Raza IS a mainstream group that advocates on behalf of Hispanics. Are you out of your mind, AWCheney? Please post proof of your ludicrous statement:
“they have opened schools all around the country where they are teaching Professor Gutierrez’ party line to young Hispanic children” by which I assume you mean “kill the gringo”.
And I don’t mean proof as uttered by a right wing, extremist, bold faced, self righteous liar.
I don’t know if there was supposed to be sound with the youtube video you posted, but I didn’t hear anything. I don’t know who this Gutierrez is but all I saw was a bunch of quotes with NO date or source where the quote was taken from. Why should I believe this is even true? Who made this video? I didn’t see any byline, but I could have missed it. I’m not defending it, but I need to know who put it together and where they got their information from.
I will tell you something that angers me about National Council of La Raza. They insisted that ALL limited English proficient students, even beginners, be required to participate in Virginia’s annual standards of learning tests in Reading and Math. When local school districts tried to get the Dept of Ed to exempt these students from an assessment that makes no sense, NCLR wrote a letter to the Secretary of Education, and I believe testified, urging that Virginia not be allowed to exempt students, for fear that they will be ignored and “left behind”.
They are a serious, mainstream, nonpartisan advocacy group.
I do not think NCLR has anything to do with Professor Professor Gutierrez. I do not think that his group is related to the mainstream group, which if I had to associate with another group, it would be the NAACP.
Now I do associate Professor Professor Gutierrez with KKK type organizations. He just seemed like another hate monger to me.
I equate the expression ‘la raza’ to navajo dine (accent over the e). Very difficult to define accurately if you aren’t a member. It does not have to be racist at all. Some people have chosen to make it racist. Perhaps another analogy would be one the confederate flags. To many, that flag is a sign of their heritage. Others have hi-jacked the flag and use it as a symbol of hate and racism.
Fontbonne: Thanks for the report. I tried to watch it on tv. Neither of the news stations gave the rally much coverage and I forgot to check c-span. I am glad everyone behaved. I actually see nothing wrong with saying NO-ba-ma. That is just cheering for your side and against the other guy… sort of akin to hollering at the ‘Duke Flukes’ during a basketball game.
What was Corey doing out there? Inquiring minds want to know.
Professor Gutierrez –Isn’t that guy who works for the UN and was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?
Which Professor Gutierrez are we talking about? I’m looking him up, but it’s not like Gutierrez is an original name!
I’m assuming this is the guy:
About Professor Gutiérrez
Dr. José Angel Gutiérrez is a 1962 graduate of Crystal City High School in Crystal City, Texas. He has also earned degrees from Texas A & M University at Kingsville (B.A. 1966), St. Mary’s University in San Antonio, Texas (M.A. 1968), the University of Texas at Austin (Ph.D. 1976) and the University of Houston, Bates College of Law, Houston, Texas (J.D. 1988). He has done other postdoctoral work at Stanford University, Colegio de México, University of Washington, and Centro de Estudios Económicos y Sociales del Tercer Mundo in Mexico City, Mexico.
His book publications include El Político: The Mexican American Elected Official (El Paso: Mictla Publications, 1972); A Gringo Manual on How to Handle Mexicans (Piedras Negras, Coahuila, Mexico: Imprenta Velasco Burkhardt, 1974); A War of Words (co-authored) (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1985); The Making of a Chicano Militant: Lessons from Cristal (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1998); My Struggle for the Land: Autobiography of Reies López Tijerina (translated and condensed, (Houston: Arte Publico Press, forthcoming); and, a revised and expanded edition of A Gringo Manual on How to Handle Mexicans (Houston: Arte Publico Press, forthcoming). He also has written several articles and chapters over the years, the most recent being “Chicano Music: The Politics and Evolution to 1950,” for an anthology edited by Lawrence Clayton for Texas A & M University Press, forthcoming; “Binacionalismo en el siglo XXI: Chicanos y mexicanos en los Estados Unidos,” Fondo Editorial Huaxaca, Oaxaca, Mexico, forthcoming; “Experiences of Chicana County Judges in Texas Politics: In Their Own Words,” Frontiers: A Journal of Women’s Studies, 20:1, Spring 1999; and, “Los dos Mexicos,” Extensiones: Revista Interdisciplinaria de la Universidad Intercontinental, Mexico D.F., Mexico 4:1 y 2. 1997.
He currently is at work on three manuscripts: A Chicano Manual on How to Handle Gringos; Chicano Leadership: Local Elected Officials in Texas, 1950-2000, which is based on 157 oral history interviews he conducted between 1996 and 2000; and, Tracking King Tiger: The Federal and State Government Surveillance of Reies López Tijerina and the Land Recovery Movement.
During the mid-1960s through the Chicano Movement and to the present time, Dr. Gutiérrez was lead organizer, founder and co-founder of several organizations such as the Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO), Mexican American Unity Council (MAUC), Ciudadanos Unidos, Obreros Unidos Independientes, La Raza Unida Party, Winter Garden Project, Becas Para Aztlán, Oregon Council for Hispanic Advancement, Northwest Voter Registration and Education Project, and Grupo de Apoyo para Immigrantes Latin Americanos (GAILA). He has been the subject of many articles and film documentaries, the most recent being the PBS three-part video series, CHICANO! The Mexican American Struggle for Civil Rights, and is mentioned in many Chicano history and political science books for his activism.
Dr. Gutiérrez has received many honors including being named as one of the “100 Outstanding Latino Texans of the 20th Century” by Latino Monthly, January 2000, and “Distinguished Texas Hispanic by Texas Hispanic Magazine, October 1996. He received the Distinguished Faculty Award from the Texas Association of Chicanos in Higher Education in June 1995, and the National Council of La Raza’s Chicano Hero Award in 1994.
He founded the Center for Mexican American Studies (CMAS) at the University of Texas at Arlington in 1994 and served as its Director until December 1996, at which time he became the Special Advisor to the President of the university until December 1998.
Dr. Gutiérrez has been elected and appointed to public office since 1970. He has served as an elected Trustee and President of the Crystal City Independent School District (1970-1973), Urban Renewal Commissioner for Crystal City, Texas (1970-1972), County Judge for Zavala County, Texas (1974-1978, re-elected 1978-1981), Commissioner for the Oregon Commission on International Trade (1983-1985), Administrative Law Judge for the City of Dallas (1900-1992), and member of the Ethics Commission for the City of Dallas 1999-2000).
–from University of TX library
Letter from La Raza:
Open Letter to the Public:
Those familiar with the work of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) know that we are the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., and that we are an American institution committed to strengthening this great nation by promoting the advancement of Latino families. Our mission is to create opportunities and open the door to the American Dream for Latino and other families.
We proudly represent nearly 300 Affiliates – community-based organizations providing a range of essential services to millions of Latinos and others in need. Since 1997, NCLR and its Affiliates have helped more than 22,000 low-income Hispanic families purchase their first homes. In addition, NCLR’s network of 115 charter schools provides quality education to more than 25,000 Latino children every year. The health clinics we help build and the lay health educators we train provided care and information about prevention and detection of serious illnesses to nearly 100,000 people in 2006. Our Affiliates are working every day to help Hispanic immigrants integrate fully into American society by providing English-language classes, civics courses, or naturalization assistance.
NCLR is also among the most recognized organizations in the nonprofit sector. Our work in the health arena has been honored by the Surgeon General of the United States and by numerous professional organizations. Both our former President/CEO and the current Chair of our Board of Directors have earned the prestigious Hubert H. Humphrey Civil Rights Award by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and The Nonprofit Times has recognized NCLR’s leadership with its coveted “Power and Influence Top 50” award, honoring the top 50 leaders shaping the nonprofit world. In addition, NCLR is featured alongside Habitat for Humanity and the Heritage Foundation in Forces for Good: The Six Practices of High-Impact Nonprofits, a book that analyzes the practices of 12 nonprofit organizations which have successfully created social change (released in October 2007).
We recognize that some people might be confused about our organization’s name, our mission, and our work. Much of this is understandable. Compared to some of our venerable counterparts in the civil rights and advocacy community, we are a relatively young institution, representing Latinos, an historically disadvantaged and oft-misunderstood ethnic minority. We have a Spanish term in our name, “La Raza” (meaning “the people” or “community”), which is often mistranslated. Furthermore, we are engaged in some of the most controversial issues of our time, which we believe is essential if we are to stay true to our mission.
As an advocacy organization engaged in the public arena, we know that some will disagree with our views. As Americans committed to basic civil rights, we respect anyone’s right to do so.
But it is also clear that some critics are willfully distorting the facts and deliberately mischaracterizing our organization and our work. Recently, we have been the subject of a number of ad hominem attacks that we believe cross the line of civility in public discourse.
At times, we have ignored these attacks, preferring to invest our precious time and resources in our work, believing that the quality of the work speaks for itself. At other times, we have responded in a civil fashion, through private correspondence or by requesting a meeting with a critic so we can discuss our differences. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do this in every case, especially when our private requests for civil discussion are responded to with further unfounded attacks, often echoed in the media as if they were accurate, which they are not.
So, today we are engaging in an unprecedented step to make sure that the record is as clear and accessible as we can possibly make it. We do so in the interest of full disclosure and in the spirit of complete transparency. We trust that, after reviewing all of these materials, readers will come to their own conclusions about the merits of these and similar attacks to which we have been subjected.
Janet Murguía
President and CEO
National Council of La Raza
NCLR Responds: A Point-by-Point Analysis
The following are common misconceptions voiced about NCLR and our work. Please click on the links below for more information on NCLR’s response to each accusation.
The Translation of Our Name: National Council of La Raza
Support of Separatist Organizations
Reconquista and Segregation
Solely Hispanic-serving Programs
Border Security and Immigration
Full Disclosure of Our Lobbying Funds
Earmark of Federal Funds
1. The Translation of Our Name: National Council of La Raza
Many people incorrectly translate our name, “La Raza,” as “the race.” While it is true that one meaning of “raza” in Spanish is indeed “race,” in Spanish, as in English and any other language, words can and do have multiple meanings. As noted in several online dictionaries, “La Raza” means “the people” or “the community.” Translating our name as “the race” is not only inaccurate, it is factually incorrect. “Hispanic” is an ethnicity, not a race. As anyone who has ever met a Dominican American, Mexican American, or Spanish American can attest, Hispanics can be and are members of any and all races.
The term “La Raza” has its origins in early 20th century Latin American literature and translates into English most closely as “the people,” or, according to some scholars, “the Hispanic people of the New World.” The term was coined by Mexican scholar José Vasconcelos to reflect the fact that the people of Latin America are a mixture of many of the world’s races, cultures, and religions. Mistranslating “La Raza” to mean “the race” implies that it is a term meant to exclude others. In fact, the full term coined by Vasconcelos, “La Raza Cósmica,” meaning the “cosmic people,” was developed to reflect not purity but the mixture inherent in the Hispanic people. This is an inclusive concept, meaning that Hispanics share with all other peoples of the world a common heritage and destiny.
2. Support of Separatist Organizations
NCLR has never supported, and does not support, separatist organizations. Some critics have accused MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlán) of being a separatist organization and denounced NCLR for being a “major funder” of the organization. The reality is that in 2003, NCLR provided one chapter of the organization (Georgetown University) with a $2,500 subgrant to support a conference of Latino students – mainly from the Southwest and West Coast – who were attending East Coast colleges but who could not afford to travel home for Thanksgiving. These Latino student groups hold mini-conferences with workshops and speakers, bringing together students who are often the first high school graduates and college attendees in their families.
According to its mission statement, MEChA is a student organization whose primary objectives are educational – to help Latino students finish high school and go to college, and to support them while at institutions of higher education. NCLR freely acknowledges that some of the organization’s founding documents, e.g., Plan Espiritual de Aztlán, contain inappropriate rhetoric, and NCLR also acknowledges that rhetoric from some MEChA members has been extremist and inflammatory. In a June 2006 Los Angeles Times op-ed, journalist Gustavo Arellano noted that all of the MEChA members of his class graduated from college and have gone on to successful careers, a rarity at a time when only 12% of Latinos have a college degree. And to the group’s founding documents, Arellano also pointed out that “few members take these dated relics of the 1960s seriously, if they even bothered to read them.”
NCLR has publicly and repeatedly disavowed this rhetoric as we have others that we believe are inappropriate, as we did when we criticized a pro-separatist Latino website for its racist and anti-Semitic views. We will continue, however, to support programs and activities that help more Hispanics enter and finish college.
Throughout its history NCLR has supported numerous initiatives to oppose all forms of unlawful discrimination; for example:
A series of campaigns in conjunction with the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Education Fund calling on all Americans to be tolerant of diversity
Joint initiatives with the National Urban League, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, and Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics to identify and denounce hate crimes and other acts of intolerance
Educational seminars and roundtables to expose and explore the causes of discrimination against Afro-Latinos and Indigenous Latinos, including instances of discrimination perpetrated by fellow Hispanics
Public service campaigns with the National Fair Housing Alliance, the Children’s Defense Fund, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, and other partners to prevent housing discrimination against minorities, families with children, and individuals with disabilities
3. Reconquista and Segregation
Another misconception about NCLR is that we support a “Reconquista,” or the right of Mexico to reclaim land in the southwestern United States. NCLR has not made and does not make any such claim; indeed, such a claim is so far outside of the mainstream of the Latino community that we find it incredible that our critics raise it as an issue. NCLR has never supported and does not endorse the notion of a “Reconquista” or “Aztlán.” Similarly, NCLR’s critics falsely claim that the statement “Por La Raza todo, Fuera de La Raza nada,” [“For the community everything, outside the community nothing”] is NCLR’s motto. NCLR unequivocally rejects this statement, which is not and has never been the motto of any Latino organization.
NCLR’s work as a civil rights institution is about inclusion and participation in the American Dream, including extensive efforts to assist new immigrants in the process of fully integrating into American life. In fact, NCLR and its Affiliates work every day to provide English classes, support naturalization efforts, and provide other services that help integrate immigrants fully into American society.
Many of these critics claim that NCLR supports dividing up sections or regions of this country by race or ethnic heritage. In particular, this claim was made by one outspoken critic of NCLR, Representative Charlie Norwood (R-GA), who unfortunately passed away on February 13, 2007. As the nation’s largest Hispanic civil rights organization, NCLR has a long, proud, well-documented history of opposing segregation based on race or ethnicity. Toward that end, we have actively contributed to the enactment and enforcement of fair housing and other civil rights laws, and supported numerous measures to ensure that all Americans have the freedom to choose where to live.
NCLR has also supported:
Programs supporting gender pay equity and affirmative action for small and disadvantaged businesses and affirmative action in higher education; Rep. Norwood voted against gender pay equity and affirmative action. (See pages vii and viii for descriptions of legislation and page 6 for Norwood’s votes.)
Expanding coverage and toughening penalties in hate crimes legislation, in part because such crimes are often used to deter racial, ethnic, or religious minorities from living where they choose; Rep. Norwood opposed this legislation. (See page 2 for description of legislation and page 11 for Norwood’s vote.)
More funding for affordable housing and programs to combat housing discrimination; Rep. Norwood voted against more funding for these programs. (See page 3 for description of legislation and page 13 for Norwood’s vote.)
Removing barriers to voting for all Americans, regardless of race, ethnicity, or disability; Rep. Norwood opposed the recent extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
4. Solely Hispanic-serving Programs
Critics also argue that NCLR’s programs only serve Hispanics. This is simply not true. NCLR and its programs are sanctioned by civil rights laws administered by independent agencies at the federal, state, and local level. We helped enact some of these laws, and we take them very seriously.
For example, in 2006, as part of NCLR’s homeownership program, NCLR Affiliates served about 29,000 clients. Almost 20% were White and approximately 12% were African American. The program targets low-income neighborhoods that contain large Hispanic populations. NCLR Affiliates are some of the few institutions in many cities that offer their services in both English and Spanish. Due to the demographics of the neighborhoods served, and the type of services offered by NCLR Affiliates, collectively they tend to attract an Hispanic clientele, although not exclusively.
We note that NCLR’s staff includes Americans from all racial and ethnic groups – White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American. We note further that NCLR’s bylaws, personnel policies, and institutional values contain explicit prohibitions against discrimination.
5. Border Security and Immigration
Unfortunately, NCLR has been called an “open-borders advocate” and the “illegal alien lobby” numerous times. NCLR has repeatedly recognized the right of the United States, as a sovereign nation, to control its borders. Moreover, NCLR has supported numerous specific measures to strengthen border enforcement, provided that such enforcement is conducted fairly, humanely, and in a nondiscriminatory fashion.
For example:
NCLR helped draft and advocated for bipartisan legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate which included tough enforcement measures against unauthorized migration.
NCLR’s President and CEO served on and endorsed the recommendations of the Independent Task Force on Immigration and America’s Future, an independent, bipartisan, blue ribbon commission chaired by former Rep. Lee Hamilton and former Senator Spencer Abraham, which recently released a set of recommendations on immigration reform, including more than a dozen new enforcement measures.
In a major address in San Diego in 2005, NCLR President Janet Murguía stressed that any comprehensive immigration reform needed to include a strong, effective, and humane enforcement component.
All of NCLR’s policy materials describing its positions and activities on the immigration debate are all available on its website. In particular, an Issue Brief, Immigration Reform: Comprehensive Solutions to Complex Problems can be found here. In addition, a set of FAQs related to NCLR’s position on immigration can be found here.
6. Full Disclosure of Our Lobbying Funds
Information regarding NCLR’s lobbying expenses and activities is available and easily accessible to the public and updated twice a year. NCLR carries out its lobbying activities in strict compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including filing reports twice a year with the clerks of the U.S. House of Representatives** and the U.S. Senate. NCLR’s expenses for activities defined by law as lobbying, at the federal and state level, range from 1%-2% of its annual budget. Lobbying expenses are separately accounted for, consistent with nonprofit best practices, and are supported by unrestricted revenues such as Affiliate dues, registration fees, sponsorships for events, and other unrestricted funds. No public or foundation funds are used, directly or indirectly, to support any lobbying activity. In addition, consistent with nonprofit best practices, NCLR is subject to an annual audit by an independent auditor and publishes its financial information in its Annual Report, which is readily available to the public.
**To access public records filed with the House of Representatives, you must visit the following:Office of the Clerk – U.S. House of RepresentativesB106 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, DC. 20515-6612
7. Earmark of Federal Funds
Some critics have implied that federal funding earmarked to NCLR for housing and community development financing has been used, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, to advance our public policy efforts on immigration. This is simply inaccurate.
Our housing and community development financing is carried out through our subsidiary, the Raza Development Fund (RDF). Established in 1999, the mission of RDF is to bring private capital and development assistance to local organizations serving Latino families in areas such as affordable housing, primary health care, and educational facilities. The RDF board of directors includes experts in housing and community programs as well as representatives from a number of prominent private financial institutions including Bank of America, State Farm Insurance Company, Citi, and JPMorgan Chase.
In 1999, the Department of the Treasury certified RDF as a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI). Today, RDF is by far the nation’s largest and most successful Latino CDFI. Since its inception, RDF has made more than $50 million in loans. About half of RDF’s capitalization comes from private financial institutions including State Farm Insurance Company, Bank of America, Allstate Insurance, and other sources. RDF uses these monies, along with other public and private funds, to finance charter schools, health clinics, day care centers, and other community facilities; affordable housing developments; and small businesses.
RDF uses the funds appropriated by Congress under the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Fund for the sole purpose of supporting its lending activities. Moreover, RDF’s policy is that all earnings from its lending activities are to be reinvested in the fund for the sole purpose of advancing its mission. Thus, no federal funding earmarked to RDF has been retained by NCLR for any purpose; on the contrary, NCLR supports RDF by deploying considerable resources of its own to assist Latino-serving community-based organizations in developing community facilities and housing programs.
Conclusion
NCLR has published this extensive analysis because we trust readers to come to their own conclusions about the merits, or lack thereof, of our critics’ charges. View below what some other observers have concluded.
The Nobel Peace Prize…thanks for the chuckle, Pinko. The video at the top of this thread really put me over the edge.
Fire, I had the wrong guy with the Nobel Prize. (I was thinking of Bustamante, also a professor and UN guy.) I think the bio I posted is the right guy, though, isn’t it?
Anyone care to respond to this comment on PN?
Posted by ( anonmom ) on October 18, 2008 at 4:18 pm
You are sounding more and more delusional, kgotthardt. Perhaps you should get up and get out of the house a little. Do you really believe all of these lies, or are you making this stuff up as you go along? Do you really think that your anti gal pals take you at all seriously? Too bad you don’t know EVERYTHING that goes on–or is said–behind the scenes.
Pinko, thank you so much for finding and posting this explanation. THANK YOU.
The same folks who consider Obama a socialist for engaging in community organizing on behalf of poor blacks are likely to say the same thing about NCLR. Advocacy on behalf of minorities apparently means you’re a socialist. That whole argument is enfuriating.
But it is so reassuring to know that so many also see through the fear mongering.
Thanks again.
My pleasure, Fire!
What is PN?
So tell me that nasty sounding guy didn’t get the Nobel Peace Prize, please!
Potomac News. Sorry!
No I had Bustamante confused with this other dude. But if the bio I got on Gutierrez is the right guy, he’s got a lot going for him.
Moon, we don’t really know anything about the Professor from the youtube video. As I said, we don’t know who made that video, and it consists of a bunch of quotes with no attribution as to the source. Only one says The New York Times, but no date and no way to know if it’s even true. How do we know it was not posted by a disgruntled student to smear the guy’s name? I’m not defending him because I don’t know him, but that random video has red flags all over it. Anyone can post anything on youtube.
MH, all the local Repub elected officials were there. I couldn’t even see Corey and, mercifully, he did not speak. Though I did not applaud for him, I gave a very discreet Bronx Cheer.
And on that other thing (video) – next time you go to YouTube, do a search on ‘DNC Protestors Fox News’. Yeesh.
“I don’t know if there was supposed to be sound with the youtube video you posted, but I didn’t hear anything.”
There is sound, Firedancer…very disturbing sound (his speech). Check your volume first and, if it’s up, you may have a problem with your sound card. You’ll need to run a system check.
I got sound on that video. Yeah, the gringos are dying in the sense the baby boomers are all getting older at once. There’s the argument that once this happens, there will be a decrease in laborers.
I would think if he wanted to kill everyone off, he wouldn’t have survived so long at his University. Universities are usually opposed to giving psycho killers tenure.
BTW, the bio I posted IS the correct one right from Univ. of TX. Read it.
Thanks for the tip, AWC. That’s the first time I haven’t been able to get sound. I’ll listen to it when I’m on my other computer and see if I feel differently. But I am interested in your comments if you have read Pinko’s post from NCLR.
Listen to his speech, Firedancer. When you do, email me (you have my email address) and we can discuss it (I need to go back to some research and I don’t really have the time right now for a variety of reasons…otherwise I would have posted something new long before now on my own blog). I believe it is a subject worthy of discussion, taking adequate time to discuss it in proper context.
These are notes from Gutierrez’s interview in 1969, not exactly a peaceful time in our nation. I will keep researching to see if he has since changed his philosophy. Some of this (below) sounds a little Black-Panther to me. It’s about as “nice” as what we saw in the video posting here at Anti.
___________________________________________
Statements by Jose Angel Gutierrez, San Antonio Evening News, April 11, 1969
Official Statements and FAQs — 26 April 2006
San Antonio Evening News
April 11, 1969
Reporter Kemper Diehl
MAYO LEADER WARNS OF VIOLENCE, RIOTING
Statement made by Mexican Youth Organization: (MAYO)
April 10, 1969
“MAYO has found that both federal and religious programs aimed at social change do not meet the needs of the Mexicanos of this state. Further we find that the vicious cultural genocide being inflicted upon La Raza by gringos and their institutions not only severely damage our human dignity but also make it impossible for La Raza to develop its right of self-determination. For these reasons, top priority is given to identifying and exposing the gringo. We also promote the social welfare of Mexicanos through education designed to enlarge the capabilities of indigenous leaders. We hope to secure our human and civil rights to eliminate bigotry and racism, to lessen the tensions in our barrios and combat the deterioration of our communities. Our organization, largely comprised of youth, is committed to effecting meaningful social change. Social change that will enable La Raza to become masters of their destiny, owners of their resources, both human and natural, and a culturally and spiritually separate people from the gringo. Only through this program, we of MAYO see the possibility of surviving this century as a free and complete family of Mexicanos. We will not try to assimilate into this gringo society in Texas nor will we encourage anyone else to do so. Rather MAYO once again asked of friends here and across the nation to assist us in our actions. We intend to become free as a people in order to enjoy the abundance of our country and share it with those less fortunate. MAYO will not engage in controversy with fellow Mexicanos regardless of how unfounded and vindictive their accusations may be. We realize that the effects of cultural genocide takes many forms some Mexicanos will become psychologically castrated, others will become demagogues and gringos as well as others will come together, resist and eliminate the gringo. We will be with the latter.”
Mario Compean, Committee of Bario Betterment
Norman Guerrero, University of the Bario
Juan Rocha, Mexican American Legal Defense Fund
Jose Angel Gutierrez, Staff Investigator and Community Involvement Specialist for Mexican American Legal Defense Fund
Comments made by Gutierrez during news conference after statement was presented to the media
Reporter: What is your definition of a gringo?
Gutierrez: A person or an institution who has a certain policy or program or attitudes that reflect bigotry, racism, discord and prejudice and violence.
Reporter: Are the majority of Anglo-Americans gringos?
Gutierrez: According to the Kerner report, we could say yes to that answer. The majority of the ones here in this state are gringos.
Reporter: What was meant by the phrase eliminate the gringos in the MAYO statement?
Gutierrez: You can eliminate an individual in various ways. You can certainly kill him, but that is not our intent at the moment. You can remove the basis of support that he operates from, be it economic, political, or social. That is what we intend to do.
Reporter: If nothing else works you are going to kill all the gringos?
Gutierrez: We will have to find out if nothing else will work.
Reporter: And then you are going to kill us all?
Gutierrez: If it doesn’t work. I would like to add to you that if you label yourself a gringo then you are one of the enemy.
Reporter: Are you a gringo because you have showed racial animosity toward Anglo Americans.
Gutierrez: I do not accept the premise that I display racial animosity. I don’t think I have. I think I am identifying the problem and attempting to point out what the problem is.
Reporter: Can you say that “some of my best friends are Anglos”?
Gutierrez: That is a racist statement. I would not be that derogatory or condescending. I would say that a lot of people are friends of mine and some of them are Anglos.
Reporter: Does the MAYO group seek a separate society?
Gutierrez: I did not mention society. I said culturally and spiritually we are distinct and we don’t wish to be any part of this racist society. We have something beautiful to begin with. I want to emphasize that the MAYO aim is to resist any further cultural genocide.
Reporter: Does MAYO identify with the people of Mexico in its aims?
Gutierrez: If they share the same values, yes. We are different from the Mexicans in Mexico in that we have been able to develop and adapt to the local situation here and as a consequence we have modified many of our value systems.
Reporter: If worse comes to worst, will you kill gringos?
Gutierrez: If worse comes to worst, and we have to resort to that means, it would be self defense.
Reporter: Do you hate gringos?
Gutierrez: Yes I do.
Reporter: Is there a time limit as to when it might be determined that worst had come to worst?
Gutierrez: Well, I can only make a personal decision. If the attacks on my person and my property continue as they have been doing then it will only be a matter of a few years. Last year part of my property in Crystal City was burned. Two months ago my home was burned in Crystal City. In 1963 I was kidnapped and coerced, or attempted to be coerced, by gringo elements. In the whole attempt to create an organization and movement, I have been abused and misused by a lot of people. If this continues, within a few years I will no longer try to work with anybody.
Reporter: Why have 500,000 Mexican nationals immigrated to the U.S. in the last 15 years despite the charges of the misery and degradation they faced?
Gutierrez: Maybe they don’t know any better. You will find about an equal number going back.
Reporter: Who might be called the “white hats” and “black hats” in your view?
Gutierrez: In gringos, there is nobody wearing white hats. They are all a bunch of animals. Anglos who have open minds and a genuine interest in resolving the conflict and ills of the community will receive cooperation from MAYO. All they have to do is declare themselves.
Now the analysis (more coming):
Because of the various criticisms that Gutierrez has had to confront, he has opened himself to a series of debates in which his most controversial views are examined. Purdue University graduate, and debate coordinator, Brian Boothe, helped Gutierrez appear on The Sean Hannity Show to debate conservative David Horowitz, writer of The Professors. The debate can be found beginning on page 7, here. In this debate Gutierrez specifically denied ever having said the quote attributed to him by “American Patrol” at the beginning of this section, as well as a number of other statements attributed to him.
Gutierrez has also said that he does not use “gringos” to refer to all white people, but instead uses it to refer to people of any race who hold a certain racist mindset. In this article from The Dallas Morning News, Gutierrez is quoted as saying “Not all Anglos are gringos, and not all gringos are white. I have met some Hispanics, blacks and Mexican nationals that are as racist and prejudiced against our Raza in the U.S. as any gringo. In fact, in Mexican society there is an entire class of anti-Mexican Mexicans. I have met many of them.” He is also quoted as saying “It’s a mindset. To me, a gringo is anyone with anti-Mexican, anti-immigrant views. Some of them are us. There are ‘High-Spanics’ who want to be anything but Mexican. It doesn’t follow at all that all Anglo-Saxons are gringos. Racism is not the exclusive venue of white people.”
Perhaps he just needs to eliminate that word (gringo) from his vocabulary and that would take away any misunderstanding.
If the speech I heard on the link left by awc was Gutierrez, then I have no use for him.