Hmmmm.
Posted on 05/06/2008 10:01:33 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Now there are three of us!
McCrypt needs radical racists to replace the conservative base as he liberalizes the Republican Party, he isn’t going to repudiate anyone who isn’t conservative.
Ping!
bttt
Hmmmm.
Juan Hernandez should be shipped back to Mesopotamia ~ that’s about 56 generations ago (counting ‘em at 5 per century).
ROTFLMAO!!! ;)
also they advocate for the violent overthrow of the US
“I’ll be “green” and not bother driving that day.”
Staying home is not the answer.
I’ll not vote for McCain. I’ll write-in or vote the CP but there are too many important, local elections to stay home.
bump
ping
In the interest of full disclosure here are the responses of NCLR to charges made against them;
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 Representatives
B106 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, 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 $50 million in loans. About half of RDF’s capitalization comes from private financial institutions including State Farm Insurance Company, Bank of America, Allstate Insurance, and other sources. RDF uses these monies, along with other public and private funds, to finance charter schools, health clinics, day care centers, and other community facilities; affordable housing developments; and small businesses.
RDF uses the funds appropriated by Congress under the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Fund for the sole purpose of supporting its lending activities. Moreover, RDF’s policy is that all earnings from its lending activities are to be reinvested in the fund for the sole purpose of advancing its mission. Thus, no federal funding earmarked to RDF has been retained by NCLR for any purpose; on the contrary, NCLR supports RDF by deploying considerable resources of its own to assist Latino-serving community-based organizations in developing community facilities and housing programs.
Thanks for bullet pointing at least 10 reasons any Republican should avoid these dopes like the plague.
Someone actually willing to shill for an openly racist organization... right here, on FR.
Saddest @#$%ing thing I've ever seen, just about.
Where does your loyalty lie?
Nice try but no sale. You are just spouting PR BS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.