Posted by
Hofford74 on Thursday, July 12, 2007 11:32:54 AM
While thumbing through last Sunday's
Fort Worth Star-Telegram op-ed page, I came across an article written by local Latino Activist Richard Gonzales. He was reporting discussing a recent Latinos Unidos breakfast that was held in the Metroplex promoting Latino leadership and Latino activism in state and national politics. The author went on to say that Latinos will be the majority in Texas by 2010 and America needed strong Latino leadership for forge the way ahead for the rising Latino communities. It struck me that the writer continued to stress the need for Latino leadership for Latinos and I asked myself two questions "If we are Americans shouldn't the emphasis be on strong leadership for America by Americans?" and " If this had been an event promoting strong Caucasian leadership for the white community, wouldn't that be labeled as racists?". I decided to email Mr.Gonzales and inquire about my questions.
The following is an email dialog I had with Mr.Gonzales about my concerns.
Mr. Gonzales,
I recently read your column under the Grassroots section of the Star-Telegram's July 5 edition. I understand the need for stronger more responsible leadership in the Latino community, as it is needed in all communities. The problem with organizations like Latinos
Unidos, La Raza and LULAC is they are interested in reconquisa. Unity and strong leadership are diversions used to demand equal rights for illegal Mexican aliens. I would rather you be outright about the intentions of Latinos Unidos sir, reconquista by the Browning of American society and the legalization of all illegal Mexcian aliens.
Suppose there was an organization called
Caucassions United meet for an occasion similar to the one in your article. People like yourelf and others would label the group as racist and Nazi-like. La Raza and LULAC would run to people like you to write articles declaring the group anti-Hispanic. It seems that all people are welcome to be proud of their color and heritage except white Americans. How can you explain that?
Your goal of getting more Latinos into office is to alienate and
segrate anyone who is not Latino, namely white Americans, and accomplish reconquista through legislation, aimed at legalizing millions of criminal aliens, rather than by armed conflict. Last I checked sir, this was America. Built, run and defended by Americans of all backgrounds. We should be concerned about good American leaders for Americans, not Latino leaders for Latinos. Strong leadership for America, by Americans, should concern us all.
The 28 percent of Latinos who have not health care may be the population of
illegals who have not signed up for free social benegits yet. They may want to go down to John Peter Smith Hospital or Memorial Hospital and have their babies for free. Compliments of jack-sucker tax payers like me.
Dissapointed,
Joshua
Hofford
Keller, TX
P.S. By the way sir, Latinos became the majority ethnicity in Texas two years ago, thanks to our open borders and scared politicians who are afraid to enforce our immigration laws.
Response:
The aim of Latinos
Unidos is to promote more Latinos in public life. The organization will encourage more Latinos to run for election and speak up on issues. In my book that sounds like democracy at work.
Your take that Latinos
Unidos is some sort of national conquest is wrong. The fact is that when a people become the majority, they tend to represent the community and government more often. Why do you feat this?
Richard
My Response:
I know you are busy and I appreciate your time to respond to me. I sincerely hope that we can carry on a dialog that could lead to further understanding.
Is Latinos
Unidos going to encourage our government to enforce our immigration laws and secure our borders? You have to understand, that as a white male, there are few groups which speak for my interests. LULAC and La Raza want open borders and demand automatic citizenship for illegal aliens. If your group is going to encourage Latino leadership, are you going to promote respect and obedience of immigration America's laws?
I do not fear a majority of people representing their communities...as long as they are Americans, representing
Americans.I want what is best for Americans, not Latinos or Caucasians or Africans or Asians separately but as Americans holistically. You never addresses my point, and I think it is a valid one. Farmers Branch, by a vote of the majority of their citizens, passed strict immigration laws that was acted on by LULAC and La Raza. The vote of the people, the majority of the community voted in favor of these measures, which I am sure you were against, only to have the ordinance stopped by a Clinton appointed judge. The voice of the people, the majority, was silenced. How do you explain that?
Joshua
Response:
Josh,
The Founding Fathers were aware of one drawback about democracy and that is the majority could abuse the minority. They, therefore, allowed for a Senate where all states, regardless of size, had equal vote.
This same principal of protecting minorities from majority dictatorship was applied to our laws. The South had historically passed laws that blatantly discriminated against blacks. These Jim Crow laws were struck down by the courts. Now, one can argue that the majority ruled and therefore such laws should stand. Reasonable leaders saw that the majority was quite capable of getting it wrong.
Farmers' Branch is a glaring example. Those laws discriminate against Latinos. I know that they're aimed at the undocumented or illegal as many prefer; but the fact is that the laws target a specific group of people. If the state came up with similar laws as was tried in the last legislative session, they too would be struck down.
The courts will not allow the majority to discriminate against the minority. That's what our Founding Fathers intended. Thank God for reasonable men and women.
Richard
You can imagine that the debate could go on all day. Underlining the problem with groups like Latinos Unidos, La Raza and LULAC is that they hide behind the false notion that they exist to protect immigrant rights and promote Latino leadership. This is all code for Reconquista and an open borders agenda. Mr.Gonzales never answered by question about encouraging adherance to America's immigrations laws nor did he comment on Caucasians United prompt.The dialog was a classic case an activist hiding behind PC lies in order to push a hidden agenda.
There was a time when immigrants respected America's laws, shed their culture, learned English and wanted to be Americans. Now America is being exploited by a particular immigrant group for her generosity and noble stance for equality. None of us, including myself, objective to citizens proudly learning about their ethnic heritage, however, when those interests conflict with what is best for America, there is a problem.Latinos Unidos, LULAC and La Raza are clear threats to a unified nation of Americans.