• Your cart is currently empty.
Latina Lista: News from the Latinx perspective > Palabra Final > Immigration > Senate Republicans distance themselves from Tancredo, Gingrich and Limbaugh — but not far enough

Senate Republicans distance themselves from Tancredo, Gingrich and Limbaugh — but not far enough

LatinaLista — On the heels of President Obama’s announcement last week of Sonia Sotomayor as his Supreme Court nominee, the American public was subjected to the sad antics of extreme conservative personalities — Gingrich, Limbaugh, Coulter, Tancredo — who undeniably relish the media spotlight, and sought those extra five minutes of fame by bashing Sotomayor.
As the week went on, charges by these individuals only got more outlandish. Starting with just labeling her as a racist then going on to say she practiced “reverse racism” to finally saying that she belonged to an organization the equivalent of the KKK for Latinos, these individuals exemplified just how low each of them in their own way would go to get a coveted seat before the television camera.
Sadly, in their quest for ratings, each of the major networks and cable news shows have indulged these extremists to the point that now one of the most eminent Latino organizations has to defend itself against an intentional slander by former Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo.
Tancredo has equated the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), a 40-year-old civil rights organization, with the Ku Klux Klan. He obviously has not visited the web site and read the history or ALL the different projects, studies, activities and issues that the NCLR has championed — or he just doesn’t care.


He seems to be caught up over the word “La Raza” and seems to think that it’s a nasty word. The same as that other word he and his colleagues have taken such great issue with — “Latina.”
As the publisher of a site that makes it a point to use the word “Latina” prominently, I can assure you that it’s not a word that is cochina (nasty). It is a descriptor to let readers know that when they read my posts, it is being voiced by a Latina and not an Anglo or an Asian or an African American woman.
While my viewpoint is drawn from my own experiences, that does not say I can’t be fair. Any regular reader knows that just by reading whom I allow to comment. If I wasn’t being fair, I would only allow those who agree with me to comment.
By stating that I am a Latina allows for full transparency on my part. I am naive enough to think that people appreciate that kind of honesty.
It’s an honesty that is hard to come by with Republican rightwingers. Given the exposure on national television that Tancredo received when he made his purposely incendiary remark about NCLR, the organization has not only been forced to set the record straight but finds itself unnecessarily involved in the qualifications debate of Sonia Sotomayor.
Seeing that no major news show has invited representatives from NCLR onto their shows to defend themselves against such slanderous remarks, or better yet have Tancredo face NCLR reps, NCLR has created an online site to condemn the remarks of these people.
After watching the Sunday morning political news interviews, it’s easy to see that Senate Republicans are quickly distancing themselves from these people as well. However, while saying that the terminology used by Limbaugh and the rest are words, as Sen. Sessions said on “Meet the Press,” that he would never use, he, nor his Republican colleagues, have condemned the remarks.
Instead each of them has said that they plan to give Sotomayor a fair hearing.
That is all anyone can ask — and has ever expected. Yet the true test will be if members of the Senate Judiciary committee can use their past experiences in vetting other Supreme Court nominees and ask the right questions and end up judging Sotomayor on her own merits and not how others, attempting to influence the process, have labeled her.
I guess it just goes to show there’s no escaping how experience, whatever the source, always has a hand in the decisions we make.

Related posts

Comment(32)

  • Avatar
    Peter Coyotl
    May 31, 2009 at 3:01 pm

    Rush Limbaugh, Beck, Tancredo, Gingrich, Bill-O, and the rest are only doing the dirty work for the elected Republicans.

  • Avatar
    cookie
    May 31, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    So do liberals in the media or politics only express certain views to get ratings or votes or is what they say exactly how they feel? I believe the latter myself in most cases.
    If Sotomayer doesn’t become the next Supreme Court Judge it will be because of her own words and action not because of any false labeling of her.

  • Avatar
    El Guapo
    June 1, 2009 at 3:50 am

    Gingrich, Limbaugh, Tancredo and Coulter have acted as expected. I mean come on. Would you expect them to act any other way?
    What is refreshingly surprising is the behavior of Michael Steel. He’s standing up to the bullies. I respect that. Hopefully more kids on the playground will stand behind him.

  • Avatar
    RealDemocrat
    June 1, 2009 at 8:56 am

    I’m not a republican, but Tancredo is correct about NCLR being The Tan Klan. Anyone who doesn’t think so, hasn’t followed their activities aside from what their website says, or they are hispanic racists themselves…

  • Avatar
    Marisa Treviño
    June 1, 2009 at 9:06 am

    RealDemocrat, You’re so off-base in your assumptions of the NCLR. Before you start labeling me a “Hispanic racist,” please cite what kind of activities they participate in that even mirror the kind of intimidation and oppression tactics that the KKK are known for.

  • Avatar
    Bianca
    June 1, 2009 at 11:13 am

    Do you think we could honestly expect any less from any of these radical right wing nut jobs? I’m not talking about them as a whole, just Coulter, Limbaugh and all the conservative pundits that form their logic out of pure hatred and anger instead of any rational bases.
    If (and hopefully, when) Sotomayor gets confirmed, I hope it’s a reality check for these pundits. It probably won’t be but hey one can only hope it would be a slap in the face to continue on to something else that’s just as equally ridiculous as accusing this woman of being a racist… Kinda hard to be racist when you went to an Ivy League school where there are hardly any racial minorities…=/

  • Avatar
    El Guapo
    June 1, 2009 at 4:59 pm

    The main complaint about La Raza is that La Raza is for La Raza, i.e. the represent the interests of Hispanic/Latino people in the US. At the same time NCLR doesn’t try to push any other races down or kill other people.
    The KKK is known for being AGAINST people. They’re remembered mostly for trying to keep Blacks, Jews, Catholics and anyone other than White Anglo-Saxon Protestant from exercising their rights.
    The suggestion that the two are similar is outrageous.

  • Avatar
    cookie
    June 1, 2009 at 7:35 pm

    The NCLR is a bit more subtle and cagey, thats all. Their goal is similar to the KKK though. They promote their numbers (especially thru illegal immigraton) and political control of this country. They want to become the new majority and the KKK wanted to retain the white majority. What is the difference other than them not hanging white people yet?

  • Avatar
    hissy
    June 2, 2009 at 6:55 am

    Any group that separates folks by race in my opinion are racist. ALL OF THEM. NAACP,KKK,LA RAZA etc. It is stupid. Why in the world is there a BLACK (only) beauty contest for example. If a White group excuded anybody…there would be hell to pay. It is WRONG and so is gender. I love the National Spelling Bee but it really bugs me everytime they say how many “boys” or “girls” are left.

  • Avatar
    Marisa Treviño
    June 2, 2009 at 8:04 am

    Hissy, depending on your age, you would understand why these groups were created in the first place. Unbelievable as it may sound today, there was a time when a person of color was subjected to such a set of double standards that no matter how hard they worked, or how polite they were, or how educated they were or how closely they followed the rules – they never got ahead of their white counterparts. It was just that reality.
    Unfortunately, there are too many holdovers today, mostly white-haired and white-skinned, who still think those times still exist.
    To your credit, you see the hypocrisy of such groups. Though some great gains have been accomplished, there still exists scenarios where color-blindness is an ideal yet to be aspired to. It would be great to really see people for who they are on the inside rather than who they are on the outside.

  • Avatar
    hissy
    June 2, 2009 at 10:27 am

    I have been around long enough to know a racist when I see one. Just last Saturday I heard a guy say…”Who was your n#gger last year?” to a person. I could not let that pass without saying something. We have done away with affirmative action in my state but we still have a bunch of idiots. Until WE ALL STOP TALKING about skin color/and giving special treatment because of it…we will never be one HUMAN RACE.

  • Avatar
    cookie
    June 2, 2009 at 10:55 am

    Of course we will always have racists in this country but it isn’t just whites who are racist today. If whites were still majorily racists then I could understand why there are advocacy groups for non-whites but that isn’t the case TODAY! I am sick of minorities trying to claim that we are still living in the Civil Rights Era.
    The problem is that we are no longer living in those times. She speaks of moving towards a “colorblind society,” but that is a pipe dream. The left cannot afford a colorblind society as their entire political strategy is based upon identity politics–dividing people up into groups and pandering to each group. This has the effect of keeping people at odds with each other, but it makes for good politics.
    The old racism against minorities is being replaced with a new racism against whites under the guise of bringing about “justice and equality.” And the new racism will be just as bad as the old racism. In fact, many leftists welcome this new discrimination as they see this as “pay back” for past injustices. I believe the common phrase which is used is “payback’s a b*tch.”
    What the left has not thought through to its logical conclusion is that as whites become more of a minority and continue to experience increasing hostility and discrimination, they will begin to form legitimate advocacy groups (NOT white supremacist or KKK) to look out after THEIR interests. When that occurs–and it will and is not far off in the future–we will finally become what our wise forefathers had warned against: a nation of squabbling nationalities. Divided, we will be weakened and in chaos. And that, after all, has been the goal of leftists and globalists all along.
    So save the BS for those who are either uninformed or naive. We can see what is going on before our very eyes.

  • Avatar
    Horace
    June 2, 2009 at 11:33 am

    “Unfortunately, there are too many holdovers today, mostly white-haired and white-skinned, who still think those times still exist.”
    I would suggest that many in the Latino community are as racist as any white person today. One can only look to the Hispanic gangs such a MS-13, primarily brown people of Amerindian extraction form El Salvador who don’t just discriminate, but actually practice genocide on black people. I haven’t heard of any white gangs doing this recently. This hierarchy of color is all too common among Hispancis, where black Hispanics are treated with disdain. And we all know that caucasian Hispancis look down on Amerindians, as we can see in South America with regard to the oppression and genocide practiced against Amerindians and theft of their land. Even among the Asian community, some of whom are also Hispanic, black people are looked down upon. I suggest that you look to people of color for the latest in open discrimination and bigotry. To single out white people, an easy target because no one will ever defend them, is far from fair. It too is hypocritical for Hispanics of European extraction to point fingers when they share the same burden of a past history (Remember the Spanish who enslaved and practiced genocide against the Amerindians?) and yes, of a present record of discrimination against others. Before you point self-righteous fingers, think about your own ethnic and racial history, because you’re ethnic group has a lot of ethnic holdovers.

  • Avatar
    Karen
    June 2, 2009 at 1:31 pm

    Cookie said: “The NCLR is a bit more subtle and cagey, thats all. Their goal is similar to the KKK though.”
    Are you insane? This is the kind of right wing hate speech spewed by the paid liars on talk radio and Fox News. Unfortunately mental midgets then repeat it like programmed robots. Look what happend to that doctor after Fox News lied about him for four years.
    NCLR is a CIVIL RIGHTS group. They advocate on behalf of Latinos who have had their rights violated. Groups like this are still needed because Latinos still face discrimination and racial assaults. Let’s not forget the case of Luis Ramirez who was killed in Pennsylvania in a brutal hate crime that a jury last month deemed a “simple assault.”
    The Klan is a domestic terrorist group with a long history of murdering people with dark skin.
    They aren’t the same.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    June 2, 2009 at 1:51 pm

    hissy :
    Any group that separates folks by race in my opinion are racist. ALL OF THEM. NAACP,KKK,LA RAZA etc. It is stupid. Why in the world is there a BLACK (only) beauty contest for example. If a White group excuded anybody…there would be hell to pay.
    Are you blind? Look around! White people have been excluding others since they invaded this Continent! They have even conjured up laws that make these exclusions legal even though they are immoral.
    That is why now that their victims are no longer going to take this crap, there IS hell to pay!

  • Avatar
    Karen
    June 2, 2009 at 1:53 pm

    Re: “Unbelievable as it may sound today, there was a time when a person of color was subjected to such a set of double standards that no matter how hard they worked, or how polite they were, or how educated…”
    That hasn’t gone away. Sotomayor is being called “dumb” by white men who have never met her and who don’t have her level of education or professional accomplishment. They’re
    calling her tempermental and bossy, the insults usually hurled at smart women who aren’t intimidated by men. And they’re saying that because she’s Latina and grew up in a housing project that she can’t
    be objective, an accusation never hurled at white male nominees. And to top it off they’re calling her a racist, which is just their own projection.
    They have their nerve after the example of GW Bush, an incompetent white man who didn’t get anything based on hard work or merit. Then he destroyed the global economy and lied about the war.
    I can’t wait until she’s confirmed and these racist morons have to eat crow.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    June 2, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    cookie :
    The NCLR is a bit more subtle and cagey, thats all. Their goal is similar to the KKK though. They promote their numbers (especially thru illegal immigraton) and political control of this country. They want to become the new majority and the KKK wanted to retain the white majority.
    You mean like the white people have been doing since they invaded this Continent and butchered all it’s original inhabitants?

  • Avatar
    cookie
    June 2, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    IMO Sotomayer’s views are racist because she will advocate for minorities over white people. At least that is what she implies in her statements.
    This is also why the NCLR is a racist organization IMO. It advocates for its “own people” ONLY, regardless of the effects on other people and the nation. It’s one thing to advocate for fair treatment, Civil Rights. But in the case of Civil Rights, EVERYONE ALREADY HAS THEM! There is no more segregation, no one is sitting at the back of the bus or drinking out of separate water fountains. Nobody is prevented from voting (unless you count the intimidation of whites by Black Panthers outside of Philadephia polling stations–apparently THAT kind of voter intimidation is allowed these days). Everyone is entitled to an education; any minority who works hard and does well in school qualifies for a plethora of race/ethnic-based grants and scholarships and federal grants and loans.
    So what these organizations are now doing is lobbying for SPECIAL rights and privileges; such as, legalization for illegals. Everyone else is expected to obey the law, but for some reason La Raza feels that “their people” should be exempt. That is racism. It was wrong when whites were entitled to special treatment and it is wrong now that it is another group advocating for special treatment.
    These groups are clinging to the excuse of discrimination of the past when those days are long gone in order to advance their own racial agenda under the guise of “advocacy”.

  • Avatar
    Horace
    June 3, 2009 at 6:04 am

    “Senate Republicans distance themselves from Tancredo, Gingrich and Limbaugh — but not far enough”
    “-but not far enough”? What does this mean, as it isn’t clear in this post what you mean by this remark. It sounds judgmental, but what is the basis for your judgment. It seems that you’ve left out the crux of the argument hinted in your title? Is this just another of your groundless and gratuitous statements meant to further discredit Republicans?

  • Avatar
    Horace
    June 3, 2009 at 6:12 am

    “Hissy, depending on your age, you would understand why these groups were created in the first place.”
    One doesn’t practice racism to counter racism. I suppose that when white people are in the minority they will be morally entitled to form racially exclusive organizations. While they once had a laudable purpose, ethnocentric and racial protectionist organizations are today no more than self-perpetuating racially/ethnically exclusive clubs mean to vie with one another for tax money and perpetuate and enact laws for their narrow constituency’s benefit. They will never disappear because they have become little more than political organiztions with exclusive memberships.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    June 3, 2009 at 12:27 pm

    Horace Cookie and Hissy, get ready to eat your words!
    Sotomayor’s Defense Of White Racist Speech Looms Large In Confirmation Battle
    Of the thousands of cases decided by Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the one that could have the most influence on her confirmation for the Supreme Court involves the defense of New York City Police Department employee who was fired for distributing bigoted and racist material.
    Sotomayor’s opinion in the 2002 case of Pappas v. Giuliani does not seem like a judicial cause célèbre for progressives. But in the days since she was named Obama Supreme Court nominee, it has emerged as an effective counterweight to charges that she is a judicial activist bent on helping minorities like herself.
    Those intimately involved in the case say that Sotomayor’s dissent — in which she defended the First Amendment rights of a employee who had distributed white supremacist material — shows a type of jurisprudence diametrically at odds with the caricature painted by her conservative critics.
    “It showed that she is not knee jerk when it comes to dealing with racial issues,” said Chris Dunn, an attorney for the New York Civil Liberties Union who argued the defense. “That was the case in which she took the side of a person obviously engaging in racist conduct and recognized the important First Amendment interest that was represented. She respected that interest and stuck to it.”
    read more
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/03/sotomayors-defense-of-whi_n_210795.html

  • Avatar
    cookie
    June 4, 2009 at 8:03 am

    “…like the white people have been doing since they invaded this Continent…”
    Evelyn, you need to be reminded of what century we are living in. White people are not “butchering” people these days. However, gangs of Latinos ARE butchering African Americans due to their race and ethnically cleansing them out of their neighborhoods! What happened in Hawaiian Gardens, Ca recently is an example of that.
    You keep howling at the wind by living in the past and becoming a caricature of racism yourself. Many so-called “Native Americans” butchered white settlers who were doing nothing but peacefully farming the land. But you make it out to be that all white people who came here were evil and butchered the native indians. Nothing like telling only part of history, right? What has that to do with us whites alive today anyway? We aren’t them and racism among whites today has greatly disapated while racism among miniorties has increased. Why don’t you go stand on some two hundred year old grave of a white person and do you howling?
    You know, your rage stems from your own racial agenda. You believe that anyone with a particular DNA (so-called “indigenous) should be able to enter any country in this hemisphere without permission of those governments, take jobs, get educated, and avail themselves of all benefits reserved for citizens of those nations. Therefore, anyone who opposes this unlimited immigration into their nation is a de facto “racist” and becomes the target of your rage. Anyone opposing your OWN racialist agenda is a racist. You really underestimate the average person’s ability to see this kind of thinking for what it really is.
    Legal immigration from Latin America is 2nd ONLY to Chinese; therefore, there is NO discrimination involved as you try to claim. You are the one with the racial agenda.

  • Avatar
    Liquidmicro
    June 4, 2009 at 9:55 am

    Sorry, Evelyn, Pappas vs Giuliani was not about Race, it was about Free Speech. Please try again.
    You should be looking at Marino v. Ortiz:
    Nominee’s Links With Advocates Fuel Her Critics
    One of the legal defense fund’s most important suits charged that a Police Department promotional exam discriminated against minority candidates. It was filed on behalf of the Hispanic Society of the New York police. The exams, the group charged, did not really measure the ability to perform in a more senior position, and were yielding unfair results: Too many whites were doing well, and too many Hispanics and African-Americans were not.
    “We saw the lawsuit as a vehicle to level the playing field,” said Mr. Perales. “It’s important to understand that she and the rest of the board, in that context, shared the philosophy that we had to remove the barriers to the advancement of Latinos.”
    The suit resulted in a settlement with the city that produced greater numbers of promotions to sergeant for Latino and African-American officers.
    Some white officers, however, felt that the settlement was unfair. They said that many white officers had outscored their Hispanic and African-American counterparts, yet were not allowed to fill the spots because of quotas. They sued, and their case, Marino v. Ortiz, reached the Supreme Court, where it failed by a 4-to-4 vote in 1988.
    Two decades later, as a federal appellate judge, Ms. Sotomayor was again forced by a volatile case to confront the issue of promotion tests and race. She and her colleagues on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit were asked to review a ruling on a claim by white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., that they had lost promotions because of their race — even though they had performed well on the Fire Department’s tests.
    Judge Sotomayor voted to affirm the lower court’s dismissal of the case, and her ruling is behind some of the most intense debate about her selection. Mr. Levey said that the employment discrimination case filed by the defense fund on behalf of Hispanic police officers raised questions about Judge Sotomayor’s credibility in the New Haven case. “It adds to the conviction that this was not accidental, and that she had a very specific agenda here.”
    This case is about Affirmative Action, which is a Race Based case, just like the Ricci case. Now can you say Conflict of Interest on her behalf? How about racial favoritism?

  • Avatar
    hissy
    June 4, 2009 at 11:36 am

    Hell to pay? Blind? Eat my words? Sounds like a threat to me. This is a COMMENT board and we write our OPINIONS. Oh..that’s right…you just copy and paste. Better stick to that…your own words show your lack of brain waves. LMAO Evelyn. You are a hoot. Ha

  • Avatar
    Lilly White
    June 4, 2009 at 12:34 pm

    I’m equally outraged by all the “seeming” opposition coming primarily from the right to Sotomayors nomination, especially since her first nomination to the courts came from first Bush- which to me translates into: “she can’t be all that activist of a judge, she can’t possibly all that left leaning!” One more outraging totally demeaning thing is Time magazine’s cover of her- making look like she just got herself out of a UV toaster. What’s up with depicting people darker than they actually are?

  • Avatar
    cookie
    June 5, 2009 at 8:30 am

    Lilly, every president in the past couple of decades including Bush has been practicing PC. Minority issues have become so touchy, feely that we now have reverse discrimination going on and all of our polticians including our presidents are walking on eggshells of late for fear of losing votes.
    I am sure that is one of the reasons that Bush chose Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General. We need to get pass this race based BS and choose people for positions because of their integrity, test results, experience and ability to perform their jobs without biasness and not because of their race or ethnicity.

  • Avatar
    Horace
    June 5, 2009 at 8:34 am

    Apparently, Sotomayor has used her derisive better-than-a-white-man routine on a regular basis. Still believe this is an aberration?:
    Sotomayor Repeatedly Referenced ‘Wise Woman’ in Speeches
    By Seth Stern | June 4, 2009 7:32 PM
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2265300/posts
    )
    Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor delivered multiple speeches between 1994 and 2003 in which she suggested “a wise Latina woman” or “wise woman” judge might “reach a better conclusion” than a male judge.
    Those speeches, released Thursday as part of Sotomayor’s responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s questionnaire, (to see Sotomayor’s responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee click here and here) suggest her widely quoted 2001 speech in which she indicated a “wise Latina” judge might make a better decision was far from a single isolated instance.
    A draft version of a October 2003 speech Sotomayor delivered at Seton Hall University stated, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.” That is identical to her October 2001 remarks at the University of California, Berkeley that have become the subject of intense criticism by Republican senators and prompted conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh to label her “racist.”
    In addition, Sotomayor delivered a series of earlier speeches in which she said “a wise woman” would reach a better decision. She delivered the first of those speeches in Puerto Rico in 1994 and then before the Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York in April 1999.
    The summary descriptions of speeches Sotomayor provided indicated she delivered remarks similar to the 1994 speech on three other occasions in 1999 and 2000 during two addresses at Yale and one at the City University of New York School of Law.
    Her repeated use of the phrases “wise Latina woman” and “wise woman” would appear to undermine the Obama administration’s assertions that the statement was simply a poor choice of words. After details of the 1994 speech circulated before the questionnaire’s release, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, emerged from his private meeting with Sotomayor and expressed new concerns about the nominee’s “identity politics

  • Avatar
    Horace
    June 5, 2009 at 2:15 pm

    Evely,
    You are exactly the reason why hatred will never disappear from the world. We have people like you to remind us every day in their expression of animosity towards the various tribles, ethnic and racial groups. You only have to go as far as looking in the mirror when you want to see a bigot. I’ve heard more hatred expressed towards white folk in stereotypical form from you than I’ve heard every place I’ve been in the world, and I’ve traveled afar, during my entire 57-years on this planet. You may be degreed, but I suspect that what you’ve learned will never do you or anyone else any good.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    June 5, 2009 at 8:38 pm

    hissy :
    Hell to pay? Blind? Eat my words? Sounds like a threat to me. This is a COMMENT board and we write our OPINIONS. Oh..that’s right…you just copy and paste. Better stick to that…your own words show your lack of brain waves. LMAO Evelyn. You are a hoot. Ha
    E
    You were the one talking about “hell to pay” when you said this. “If a White group excluded anybody…there would be hell to pay.”
    You come out swinging because your “OPINIONS” have made you look like fools. Now you have pie on your face because of the articles I posted that prove you wrong.
    You would love for me to be offended because you seem to think cut and paste for proof is a crime! Dream on hissy, as long as you lie, I will cut and paste and expose you!
    Your “OPINION” about my so called, “lack of brain waves” only exposes your ignorance!

  • Avatar
    Horace
    June 7, 2009 at 8:18 am

    Evelyn,
    Your degrees are worthless, as they seem to be the result of an education by left wing revisionists of history who have a warped view of life and find nothing worthy of the European culture that formed this country into the great nation that it is today. Who were your mentors, the discredited Ward Churchill and the hateful Nome Chomski, and others who declaim against the illegitimacy of our nation? I find it fortunate that they and people like you are seen for what you are, wacko radicals to be ignored.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    June 7, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    Horace :
    Evely,
    You are exactly the reason why hatred will never disappear from the world. We have people like you to remind us every day in their expression of animosity towards the various tribles, ethnic and racial groups. You only have to go as far as looking in the mirror when you want to see a bigot, stated the lying hate filled radical white supremists! LOL!

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    June 7, 2009 at 2:01 pm

    I answered your rant cookie. You and others will be elated to know I wont be posting here anymore because my answer was not posted. Because I dont use my opinion as fact and research every issue for credable proof before posting my answers take time to compose and if they are not posted it is time wasted so I have decided not to post here anymore. All you racists can have this blog to yourselves. I spent an hour doing research on the incident you mentioned about Hawaiian Gardens, Ca and found this.
    Amanda F. Susskind, Pacific Southwest regional director of the Anti-Defamation League in Los Angeles, said hate rhetoric is rising online and is particularly targeting youth, perpetuated in part by as many as 110 white supremacist organizations nationwide. The rhetoric appears to be influencing other groups, Toma said.
    1.This means Whites started this hate fest. That is what these white terrorist groups are teaching our youth.
    He cited law enforcement reports that some Latino gang members who targeted blacks in the Harbor Gateway area of Los Angeles were found with neo-Nazi material and some Latino gangs were forming alliances with white supremacists in prisons to prey on blacks.
    2.That proves Whites are involved in it and are hypocrits who need to clean their own racism out before pointing the finger.
    The report noted, for instance, that as of last August, Pasadena police had investigated 69 crimes involving attacks against Latinos, many of them low-wage immigrant workers who were robbed and beaten, allegedly by African Americans. But none of the cases were submitted to the county commission for inclusion in the hate crime report this year.
    3.This proves Latinos got tired of being beaten and robbed by Blacks and decided to give Blacks a taste of their own medicine! Nothing wrong with that.
    http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/25/local/me-hatecrime25
    Me Howling? I only copied and pasted an article that proved you Horace and hissy wrong! The howling comes from you trying to spin and refocus the issue of Sotomayor’s ruling that proves you were wrong!

Comments are closed.

32 Comments