Sunday, March 7, 2010

Guest Voz - Axel Woolfolk: Hey Teabaggers, WHY THE RACISM??

Guest Voz: Axel Woolfolk from Brave New Films' team. He contributes and hosts Cuéntame and runs the Spanish language blog
from the Huffington Post:
Teabaggers say this is Really Not Racism: "Mexicans Are Filthy Stinking Animals"
Mainstream media has time and again given the Tea Party and teabaggers a free pass and the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their use of racism to recruit and engage followers.
If they use bigoted, discriminatory language, it's really purely as a matter of argument. If they spew spiteful rhetoric at their rallies, it's really only one portion of the group - not everyone. If
Tom Tancredo advocates for a literacy test to be eligible to vote, it's really just a way of saying that we must all come together under one nation. If they call us - Mexicans - filthy stinking animals, well they were only referring to the illegal ones anyhow.

Enough. Racism is racism, there is no excuse for it and has no place in America's public discourse. Their attempt to use racism as a legitimate tool to further a political, economic and anti-immigration agenda is tantamount to the propagandizing of fear as a tool to incite to action. It is using violent words for violent action. Tea Party members argue that to brand the use of racism in Tea Baggers' rhetoric is to miss the point of their overall argument. Going to the extent of pushing to the frontlines minority members who allegedly admit that as minorities they were part of a "cradle-to-grave government dependency." In the meantime in the backlines they push to isolate minorities as the cause for all the national ills.

What is becoming quite evident is that Tea Party/Tea Baggers are not even aware of their harmful rhetoric. They seemingly cannot disassociate the economic argument from a racial perspective. There is a link, they argue - and that link is valid to present. Their reluctance to admit that this is the essence of their argument is a sign that they are oblivious to the harm their words are having on communities, like the Latino community, as a whole.One explanation could be in how the Tea Party came to be. In their quest to grow what they call a "movement", to recruit followers and to stay relevant they have to resort to incendiary language because that represents their expanded base and their growth. This is how protests get their hundreds of followers and how their rallies become animated. Without it, there is no spectacle, no media attention: (see video)

Yet, when it comes to putting a national, political face and when it comes to their relationship with the GOP they move quickly to "disassociate" themselves from that "small fraction" of the group; in an attempt to encourage politicians to take on their mantra.
Again, enough is enough. In the process the community that has gotten hurt the most has been the Latino community and it is time we stood up to the attacks.
If Teabaggers use racism as a recruiting tool,
Latinos must expose this racism.
If they want to link our race to an economic argument, Latinos must show how our culture and contribution has actually been a key factor to halt the downward economic spiral.
If they want to recruit politicians to use us as guinea pigs for their political experiment,
we must warn our representatives of the consequences of their actions.
Finally if Teabaggers use Latinos to scare folks into recruitment - then Latinos:
It is time to show what a real political movement is.
Let's strengthen our movement today.

Follow Axel Woolfolk on Twitter:


ultima said...

I believe the video shown on my blog is morerepresentative of the type of recruitment used by the TEA party. It should appeal to all loyal Americans not the fringe elements who after all could be Democrats in sheeps clothing.

There are folks who are properly labeled as "stinkin' animals" in all races. In a different post I referred to the brutal abduction
of a Mexican national and his American wife in Mexico. I think those kidnappers could be properly called stinkin' animals along with many others who prey on innocent citizens on both sides of the borders. Doesn't sound like an effective recruitment tool, though.

Using pejorative terms like "Teabaggers" rather than a more civil reference like "members of the TEA party" is not likely to improve relations with the Hispanic community nor is their incessant support of their illegal ethnic brethren at the expense of their fellow citizens. There is a totally legitimate basis for suspecting the loyalty to America of those who do so. I wonder why it is so easy for Hispanic citizens to have these misplaced priorities rather than worrying about over population and its consequences for our quality of life, finite natural resources, and excessive pollution. You'd think that they think America would be better with a population like that of China, India, Bangladesh, or Sub-Saharan Africa. You'd think that they believe starvation and gross poverty are good things to be attained by allowing our country to be overrun by the prolific immigrants and illegal aliens who account for all of the population growth. When will they address these the real issues and stop going out of their way to antagonize other Americans with their tunnel vision about illegal aliens and immigration in general?

ultima said...

Surely you recognize that there is a certain amount of push back generated by the Hispanic community's support of illegal aliens and expanded legal immigration. Can you blame Americans for seeing a parallel between the unarmed Hispanic invasion here and the Islamization in Europe. The liberal countries of Europe have yet to wake up to the danger of losing their countries heart and soul. There is a movement in Europe similar to the TEA party movement but I suspect it is too little too late as mosques spread across the landscape and citizens are attacked for what used to be ordinary behavior of a free people. Be careful what you wish for before you consider what it will really mean to your way of life.

ultima said...

There is no need for racism in this discussion but there is room for rational discussion of what the Hispanic invasion will mean in the end. If Latinization of the U.S. is your goal and, considering the conditions in other Latin American countries, you think that would be a good thing, then you are doing the right thing. If not, every Hispanic citizen needs to acting first like an American who gives the highest priority to the national interest, our quality of life, the freedoms we enjoy,and how these relate to the availability of natural resources and a stable population.

ultima said...

Let's make a trade: you start opposing amnesty and any immigration reforms that will increase the number admitted and I will vehemently denounce any and all racism and violence directed at Hispanic citizens. It would make an interesting blog.

Dee said...

The problem is, you and most ANTI groups continue to misrepresent Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

CIR is NOT open borders nor is it amnesty. If anything was amnesty, it was allowing Europeans to come to the US in the 1800s and early 1900s. All they had to do is enter the Ellis Island, sign a piece of paper, and voila, they were citizens.

The 1st immigration laws were racist, meant to exclude Chinese/Asians, then the Eastern and Southern European. You know this.

As for Latinos, it was the US begging them to come and partnering with the Elites in Mexico to send us cheap labor via programs like the Bracero Program. Business loved this program. No safety standards, cheap labor and send them home when the work was done. Since many stayed, the number accumulated to the 12M the census bureau says we have today. Now your side wants to deport all of them and their children too. You say over time, many say immediately mass deport.

Look at the ugly racist faces taunting and blaming and name calling, not only Latinos, but our President. They don't want to know the truth. They just want to spew hate, hate and more hate and blame ALL Latinos for their every ill.

I say shame on them. I ask that they all study US History and seek first to understand. Judge not lest ye be judged.

When the CIR bill is written and communicated then we should ALL read it and discuss it and support it to improve and fix our broken processes. In particularly I want to see the backlogs in the immigration courts and in the application process resolved.

MMPete said...

From the Huffington Post (a liberal newsource of course):

"IF" they call us - Mexicans - filthy stinking animals, well they were only referring to the illegal ones anyhow."

I don't see this as something that a Tea Party member actually said because they quote no incident where that was stated. For credibility they should have quoted that incident or a person who actually said that. Even if one person had said that, it doesn't mean that all the Tea Party members agree with that.

Is this another guilt by association claim? Does this then also mean that those who are pro-illegals are also pro-reconquista?

Vicente Duque said...

Dear Dee :

I agree 100% with the article of the Huffington Post and with what you say here. It is evident from many videos that I can see in YouTube in many reports in the best Media, Websites, Blogs that these Tea Parties are filthy and dirty with Racism.

Thanks for your struggle for Kindness and Humanity and against the forces of Racism, Trickery and Deception, Tergiversation and Lying.

The sun shines very strong and can not be hidden with a finger. Truth will prevail over all deceptions, falsehoods, misrepresentatios.

The duplicity of the Tea Parties and Teabaggers is very evident for me.

PostRacism and PostRaciality :

We are living in the fabulous wonderful times of PostRacism and PostRaciality, when there is no more Racism, but only virtuous patriots and lovers of the nation.

When Hypocrisy reigns supreme. Hypocrisy is the practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

Hypocrisy is also the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc., contrary to one's real character or actual behavior, esp the pretense of virtue and piety.

Haven't you ever had a friend that turns out to be a Hypocrite at the end of the game ?? -- How Despicable !!

Racism continues being Racism even if the practicioners try to mask themselves as charity nuns and saints.

Vicente Duque

Vicente Duque said...

Liberal Prestigious Professors Weeks and Hadstate debate on Immigration - What Republicans fear most: the sophisticated Latino voter joining with the sophisticated black voter to nullify their power base, the unsophisticated white voter.

Two Weeks Notice ( Blog )

"Immigration policy and Latino votes"

Some excerpts of a long discussion :

Professor Greg Weeks :
Greg Weeks is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He is the editor of the academic journal The Latin Americanist.

Professor Greg Weeks says :
"the Washington Post echoes conventional wisdom about Latino voters and immigration reform:

But if there is no serious progress on the issue, many disillusioned Latinos will stay home in November. Others will decide that because Democrats can't deliver on immigration reform, they might as well vote Republican on the values issues.

I have seen this (or a variation on it) repeated many times, but always without evidence. Is it true? It might be, but no one ever examines its assumptions, which are the following:

Professor Jim Hadstate :

Jim Hadstate is a Retired Attorney in South Carolina : He is an intense Blogger, flight instructor, a corporate pilot, an airline pilot and an attorney. He has lived many years in Latin America and feels a strong identification with Latinos in USA and other countries. He feels that he was lucky to have one of the finest educations available, and he is now retired and strongly interested in Latin America and Latinos inside USA.

Professor Jim Hadstate says :
I would guess that a "Latino voting block" (assuming in both cases that such exists*) has more common elements with an "African-American voting block" than anything else. Specifically, the Latino Block will divide along the wealth lines and the oppressor/oppressed lines than anything else. Black voting divides similarly. African-Americans and Latinos of wealth vote Republican and the less wealthy vote Democratic.

Having said all that, the Old Media seems as incapable at adapting to a new paradigm in political thought as they are in adapting to new forms of delivery of their product. Latino and Black voters appear to be much more sophisticated than less wealthy white voters. Less wealth white voters will ignore their economic best interests to vote some stupid distraction issue(s), thereby keeping people in positions of political power who continue to oppress them

This, I think, is what the Rabid Republicans fear most: the sophisticated Latino voter joining with the sophisticated black voter to nullify their power base, the unsophisticated white voter.

Youth, Minorities, Politics :

Vicente Duque

Dee said...

Click on the video in the link I provided. You can hear the teabxgger say those words.

Additionally, all the pictures on this post are from the video. LIVE VIDEO from Teaparty Events.

Anonymous said...

"As for Latinos, it was the US begging them to come and partnering with the Elites in Mexico to send us cheap labor via programs like the Bracero Program. Business loved this program. No safety standards, cheap labor and send them home when the work was done. Since many stayed, the number accumulated to the 12M the census bureau says we have today. Now your side wants to deport all of them and their children too. You say over time, many say immediately mass deport."

No, the large accumulation of illegal aliens has only happened in the past 20 years. They weren't left over from the Bracero years. Our side? It is the U.S. government that says anyone in this country illegally should be deported. You do know your own countries laws, don't you?

ultima said...

El Duque wrote,"..."these Tea Parties are filthy and dirty with Racism." Looks very much like "dirty, stinkin' animals" doesn't it. Look at the TEA Party video on my blog Duque to learn the truth before you publish more of your tripe.

Dee said...


I only wish it was 10 years ago when you were on the debate circuit.

I would LOVE to take you on, one on one, in a civil debate about the Immigration issues and the need for Immigration Reform.

Your Fans.
My Fans.

Civilly. Logically.

I KNOW I would Win!!
Afterall. Truth and Justice are on MY SIDE!!

ultima said...

I, of course, concede our checkered past when it comes to immigration law. But the operative word is "past". When our country was still growing and developing with plenty of natural resources still remaining, a liberal immigration policy was appropriate. In actuality, some of our leaders,even in those early days of our republic, were concerned about that. I think we have seen quotes from Jefferson, Franklin, Teddy Roosevelt and others that expressed that view.

The discrimination againt certain segments of the prospective and actual immigration flow was a natural phenomenon given the understanding of the world as it existed then. The knowledge of the teeming masses of humanity in China and their employment as beasts of burden (coolies)in their own country led to parallel treatment when they arrived in the U.S. and the desire to be rid of them before they converted our country into something like China.

Later events indicated that people from all walks of life could contribute to our society and our economy. However, we have to put prior events in context. When Alfred Nobel created his famous prize, the vast majority of the winners in chemistry, physics, math, and medicine were indeed Northerrn Europeans. In that time what would you conclude about others? Would you prefer your country to be populated with these highly productive and innovative peoples or those who had shown no such ability or tendency? Given the evidence at hand, the conclusion that some immigrants were more desirable than others was inevitable. If an unbiased observer were to be asked at that time, "Should American admit more people from over-populated, backward, unproductive countries who are unable to care for their own people?" I don't think any rational person would say "yes".

ultima said...

You seem to have a high regard for your debating ability. I have had no such experience so perhaps you would win a stand up debate but perhaps not on the merits of the arguments. If you had the eloquenc of Obama and I the halting delivery of McCain the outcome migh be like that last election. We will soon see how many Americans are disallusioned by Obama's performance on the job and his leftist policies and what has amounted to nationalization of health care, autos, and banks.

The main reason Democrats are able to appeal to minorities or those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder is because they buy them off with promises of freebies funded by others, taking from those who have earned it and giving to those who have not. I think we understand how this creates a nation of people who expect the government to take care of them from the cradle to the grave, whether or not they make any effort to do so themselves. That is a pretty appealing message. One that is hard to overcome among the uneducated and even among some younger folks who have been brainwashed and indoctrinated by liberal professors. Reality sets in for some of them when they actually have to go out and get a job and work for a living. Those who fail fall back on the Democratic Party to take care of them in a way that removes all incentive to work hard and endure the stresses necessary to get ahead. Why do that in a society that says if you work hard and are successful, big government will still take some of your wealth and redistribute it to those whose indolence is being rewards. Not my cup of TEA.

ultima said...

Opponents of CIR understand it all too well. It is often described with so many euphemism that it is hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. It offers only lip service to border security instead of demanding it as a pre-condition for any consideration of amnesty or simpler immigration rules.

It describes opening the floodgates to more legal immigrants as simply fixing a broken system or relieving the logjam in immigration. CIR guarantees more immigration and a greater incentive for illegal entry because there will always be another amnesty or whatever you want to call it. No matter how they try to dress it up so that they can say, "Technically this is not amnesty." any provision that allows those who entered our country illegally to remain here and work will be viewed as amnesty. Whatever conditions are specified to qualify for amnesty will not be enforced because no mechanism for doing so will be included in the bill. Can you imagine testing 12 million people to see if they are learning or have learned English, or having to determine the amount of back taxes owed, or that the proper fine has been levied and paid? The English have an experession for the probability of CIR having any positive effects: "Not bloody likely!"

ultima said...

Winning or losing a debate would depend on the criteria used to judge the arguments and, of course, one's ability to "think on your feet" and speak effectively and coherently. If the criteria were the national interest, the preservation of our quality of life, the husbanding of our natural resources, the reduction in pollution, and the mainenance of our standard of living the outcome would be clear. If based on misguided compassion for all of the impoverished masses of the world -- not so much. We cannot accommodate more without negatively impacting all the other things I listed above. In other words, it would be a bitter victory for you if you could observe the inevitable result of your position.

ultima said...

Truth and justice on your side? Are you saying I am a liar and that your concept of social justice is the only one that should be considered even if it would mean the end of our country as we know it? Social justice does not mean that we must sacrifice our country, our quality of life, our standard of living,our natural resources, and our plans for clean air and water. If that is the kind of social justice you want, I want no part of it and there is no way you could convince an impartial audience that they should make these kinds of sacrifices to enable amnesty, more legal immigrants, and a simpler immigration process. If they knew the facts, they would opt for a thorough vetting process of admission to this country even if it does take years. They would opt for a reduction in the rate of legal immigration. They would opt for secure borders before amnesty.

I notice you did not deal with any of the points I made regarding overpopulation, finite natural resources, and pollution. That would be your downfall in any debate.

ultima said...

Here's some thoughts about CIR a la Gutierrez

Vicente Duque said...

"Elmer Gantry" America no longer exists - But there are buds, plant shoots of "the good old days" and greenshots like Sarah Palin.

"Elmer Gantry", movie of 1960, is extremely important for me as Great Cinema ART, Great Actors, Great History, Great Culture Explanation.

Isn't this amazing, at the same time and in the same year the "Elmer Gantry" was preaching, the "Great Gatsby" and "Daisy" were having a slow romance in a Luxurious setting, another Beautiful snapshot of 1924 America given by novelist Francis Scott Fitzgerald. ( novel published in 1925 ).

I beg to readers not to be angry with me, for selecting "Elmer Gantry" as number one movie for explaining America.

I am aware that America is now very diverse, more than in the Prohibition days of 192x when fictional Hypocrite Pastor Elmer Gantry had his adventures with Sister Sharon Falconer.

Sinclair Lewis wrote this novel in 1926. I am aware and realize that America is not 100% protestant now, and that America is not 100% Revivalist or Born Again.

There is more in America than Protestantism or Naive Revivals, with the added spice of Hypocrites like "Elmer Gantry" .... or sincere persons like Sister Sharon Falconer, and very few American Ladies are now Lulus in prostibules, under a Madam.

Sinclair Lewis, the novelist is a genius. He took a snapshot of a REAL BIG FAMILY in America : The White Protestants, very naive in their Revivals, and too generous with their monies.

That America no longer exists but there are buds, shoots of "the good old days" and greenshots like Sarah Palin. Talking to us about the "Real America" and the need to be given back their "America".

Youth, Minorities, Politics :

Vicente Duque

ultima said...

Now that Carlos Slim Helu has been declared the richest man in the world can we expect him to unvail a master plan for improving the lot of ordinary Mexican citizens and perhaps enticing some of them to return from the U.S?. Will he be subject to the same kind of criticism Wall Street bankers were in this country? What has actually done for el Indio Pobre de Mexico? His wealth is obscene and he should hasten to put it to work for his people. I not talking about museum and libraries with his name on them. I'm talking about using his wealth to achieve real social change in Mexico, defeat the drug lords, stop the killings in the border towns, and providing free tubal ligations and vasectomies as well as other birth control advice. With that kind of loot, he could probaly even persuade the Pope to change the Catholic Church's view of birth control and abortion. Where's post on Slim's efforts to improve the lot of ordinary Mexicans? What does El Duque have to say about this immense wealth in the hands of one person. What would Obama say: let's redistribute some of Slim's weath to pay for the repatriation of all illegal aliens and their minor children and to provide jobs for them in Mexico at a living wage.

ultima said...

If Axel Woolfork uses perjorative terms like Teabaggers, racists, etc. does that mean we can resurrect beaners, wetbacks, etc.

Vicente Duque said...

Huffington Post : The fastest-growing demographic group Hispanic Americans - A Quiet battle underway within the Republican Party - Future Fate of GOP

Intelligent Strategists know that the Republican Party can be led by Intelligent Realists or Demagogic and Racist Scoundrels.

Huffington Post
Gut Check Time for GOP on Immigration

By Robert Creamer
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win.
March 12, 2010

Gut Check Time for GOP on Immigration

Some excerpts :

There is a quiet battle underway within the Republican Party that may soon break out into the open -- and it will heavily impact whether the GOP can continue as a national political party in the decades ahead.

The conflict is over how the Party will position itself with respect to the question of immigration reform -- and just as importantly -- the fastest-growing demographic group in country: Hispanic Americans.

For many Latino voters, and their friends and families, immigration reform is more than a simple matter of policy. It's an issue that involves the future of their families and their communities. That is particularly the case because enforcement actions continue every day. Almost 400,000 immigrants were deported last year. Those deportations touch legal immigrant families -- voters -- throughout America, and they increase the pressure building within the Latino community for action.

On March 21st, a huge national march will take place on the Mall to express the frustration of the immigrant community that even as deportations continue, there has been little action on immigration reform.

One segment of the Republican Party completely understands that critical political fact. They understand that to compete successfully in the future -- on a national scale -- they must be able to contest for a sizeable segment of the Hispanic vote. Hispanics, after all, are by far the fastest growing demographic group in America. According to the Census Bureau, nearly one in six U.S. residents -- or 46.9 million people, are Hispanic -- a percentage that continues to grow.

If Republicans can't compete for Hispanic votes, they will become politically irrelevant in much of the U.S. over the next several decades. Many Republicans leaders get it.

But there is another group of Republicans who want to use immigration as wedge issue to win short-term political advantage among anxious voters who think of Latinos as threats to their culture, their tax dollars, and their jobs. As a practical matter, this group is willing to sacrifice long term political viability for short term political gain. And this second group has not been deterred by the fact that in recent elections hard core immigrant bashers have not fared well -- even in the short term.

These two factions do not fall neatly along traditional "conservative" and "moderate" lines. Former President Bush -- having seen firsthand the importance of the Latino vote in Texas -- strongly favored immigration reform. Supporters run the gamut from conservatives like Sam Brownback (R-KS) to moderates like Dick Lugar (R-IN).

Youth, Minorities, Politics :

Vicente Duque

Page Hits