national council of la raza
National Council of La Raza
Far-left racial power organization that's considered mainstream but which funds extremists (also here) and supports illegal immigration as a way of obtaining political power. Funded by, among others, the Ford Foundation, the U.S. government (also see this, this, and this), and major corporations such as HomeDepot and General Motors. Has been pandered to by many top politicians, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Karl Rove (see this). Per the Washington Post, they and a few other groups had "virtual veto power" over the provisions of the 2007 comprehensive immigration reform (i.e., amnesty) bill.
The NCLR offers an "Open Letter to the Public" called "The Truth About NCLR: NCLR Answers Critics" (nclr.org/content/viewpoints/detail/42500). The reader is encouraged to compare that to what follows.
Headed by Janet Murguia for several years, before then by Raul Yzaguirre. Former senior VP Cecilia Munoz is now part of the Obama administration. Former chairwoman is Monica Lozano (now on the Bank of America board, more here); current is Andrea Bazan (more here; she's also part of a DHS advisory council).
Their only known link to the Mexican government is that in May 2009 Murguia was given that government's "Ohtli Award", their highest honor for foreigners. That award is basically given to those putative Americans who push Mexico's agenda inside the U.S. They're also part of organizations that include others linked to that government (see Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform) (also see this) and they take every chance they can to support illegal immigration.
"We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him."
Despite that, the NCLR has taken part in campaigns against "hate speech" and has tried to silence those who discuss facts about illegal immigration. An NCLR rep called the Fairness Doctrine a "partial solution".
The NCLR has consistently opposed most immigration enforcement. In 2007, they joined with some Mexico-linked groups to oppose workplace raids. More recently, they called for a moratorium on those immigration raids until such time as an amnesty bill passes. Also in 2007, they opposed a bill that would have stopped most home loans to illegal aliens. They even wanted to give a special break to illegal aliens charged with identity theft. From one of their reports:
Congress should revise the rules concerning release, deportation, and banishment of noncitizens charged with nonviolent offenses such as identity theft, so that arrested parents can be reunited with their children in cases where children face hardship.
Note that their proposal would only apply to illegal aliens and not to U.S. citizens who were accused of the same crime.
In 2006, Michele Waslin - their former director of Immigration Policy Research - wrote the following about an amendment to an amnesty bill:
"...while it doesn't overtly mention assimilation, it is very strong on the patriotism and traditional american [sic] values language in a way which is potentially dangerous to our communities."
They support giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens; in 2004 they threatened to withdraw a convention in California if Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill from Gil Cedillo that would allow that. Munoz had to "take a deep breath" after John Kerry took the American position.
They "urge passage" (nclr.org/content/policy/detail/1331) of the DREAM Act, an anti-American bill that would let the illegal aliens covered by the bill take college educations away from U.S. citizens. See that link for the details.
In December 2008 they joined with several other organizations to demand universal healthcare for all, including illegal aliens.
They didn't oppose the 2006 events featuring foreign citizens marching through our streets demanding that we change our laws to suit them; they just wanted the marches to be after work or school. They opposed HR4437, in part because of its impact on day laborers centers; about 75% of day laborers are illegal aliens per a UCLA study. During Katrina, they supported illegal aliens taking jobs from American hurricane victims. They also admitted that their "constituents" included illegal aliens. In 2005, they got current Ag Secretary and then Iowa governor Tom Vilsack to apologize for supporting an English-only bill. For examples of their low credibility, here's a misleading Murguia editorial and a disreputable editorial from an NCLR official. And, regarding their past president, see the round-up of Yzaguirre's support for illegal immigration.
From the pro-business side, they supported AgJobs, an amnesty with an indentured servitude component and their president came out in support of guest workers. In 2007, they joined an amnesty-supporting alliance that included the US Chamber of Commerce. See also this other group including the Chamber as well as a Mexican citizen helping set U.S. immigration policy.
Important note: Some opponents of illegal immigration weaken their case by confusing the NCLR with other groups, parties, movements, or concepts that have "La Raza" in their name; for instance, the NCLR and the defunct La Raza Unida Party are not the same thing. The NCLR has not advocated for reconquista but has issued (lukewarm) renunciations of that general movement. Opponents should concentrate on their reflexive, race-based support for illegal activity and their receipt of government funds, some of which is funneled to extremists.
Democrats, far-left praise Marco Rubio's immigration moves (NCLR; Sharry; IPC; Obama and Gutierrez spox) - 01/20/13
In a January 18, 2013 press release, Marco Rubio lists some of the supposed conservatives who support his immigration amnesty plan ( peekURL.com/zycdzeU ).
To be balanced, here are some positive mentions of his plan (or at least support for his actions on comprehensive immigration reform) from those Rubio should be opposing on immigration: the Democrats and the far-left.
NCLR, SEIU, LULAC, NALEO flex their racial power and threaten Congress in new amnesty push - 12/12/12
When is ethnic nationalism and a completely race-based attitude to everything OK? When is the raw pursuit of racial power OK? When is it OK to make borderline threats against Members of Congress? When Hispanics do it, of course.
I think for us it's about understanding that we have common interests and we have to be able to understand that our demographics today, a lot of people want to pit who’s the largest minority vs. who's taking over as the largest demographic and all that.
The White House announced Tuesday that Cecilia Munoz, a former senior vice president of the National Council of La Raza, would replace Melody Barnes at the top of the [Domestic Policy Council]...
Munoz is now serving as the White House's director of intergovernmental affairs and is in charge of outreach to state and local governments...
Obama at NCLR: "yes, but..." on immigration enforcement; promotes jobs for possible illegal alien construction workers; DREAM Act; comprehensive reform... - 07/25/11
Barack Obama appeared at the National Council of La Raza convention earlier today; see the last link for our extensive coverage of that group. His unremarkable remarks are at : he didn't really say anything that he hasn't said before. As he's done before, he misled, such as by using the system is broken canard.
Supreme Court upholds 2007 Arizona immigration enforcement law; eVerify; losing: US Chamber, DOJ, Berman, NCLR, ADL, SPLC, AILA, SEIU, LULAC - 05/26/11
In a major victory for states that want to reduce illegal immigration, the US Supreme Court has upheld Arizona's 2007 "Legal Arizona Workers Act" employer enforcement law that requires the use of eVerify and that allows Arizona to pull the business licenses of companies that knowingly hire illegal aliens. Note that the 2007 law and the decision have no relation to Arizona's more recent immigration law. A Los Angeles Times article is here, and links to legal documents are here. Sonia Sotomayor voted in dissent; see her name's link.
Others who filed briefs in the case and who lost today include (see each link for more on that group):
* Rep. Howard Berman
* National Council of La Raza
* Anti Defamation League
* American Immigration Lawyers Association
* PRLDEF (a former associated group of Sotomayor)
* Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (a former associated group of Barack Obama)
* Southern Poverty Law Center
* Service Employees International Union
* National Day Laborer Organizing Network(NDLON)
* National Immigrant Justice Center
* American Immigration Council
* Asian American Justice Center
* Asian American Institute
* Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund
* Asian Law Caucus
* Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California
* League of United Latin American Citizens
* Legal Aid Society
* Los Abogados Hispanic Bar Association
* National Employment Law Project
Others on the losing side were former senator Arlen Specter and Ron Mazzoli (of the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty fame).
UPDATE: Thomas Saenz of MALDEF (which doesn't appear to have been involved in the suit) weighs in. He got one thing right: just because the 2007 law was upheld doesn't mean SB 1070 will prevail. In my opinion, states should just simply copy Arizona's 2007 law for now.
In any case, here's what Saenz says (maldef.org/news/releases/az_evrfy):
"Today's regrettable decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting is a tortured product of judicial activism responding to perceived political views of the moment. The majority proclaims itself unable to find implied preemption of an Arizona law that plainly impedes a federal scheme of exclusive enforcement of longstanding immigration-related employment law, and then, with a facile shift, easily finds an implied permission for Arizona to mandate E-verify, a power that Congress denied the federal government itself. All of this is accomplished through providing talismanic significance to the word 'licensing' even though Arizona's use of the term violates any plain-language or historical understanding of the term."
"Despite this egregious outcome, today's decision provides little predictive value as to the constitutional issue of preemption with respect to Arizona's SB 1070 and similar laws recently enacted in other states. Laws that encroach on exclusive federal immigration enforcement by mandating or permitting untrained local police officers to engage in racial profiling will find little refuge in today's decision. Wise state and local lawmakers must continue to tread carefully in areas touching on immigration. As has been the case for well over 200 years, federal action remains the sole legitimate avenue to address immigration issues."
UPDATE 2: The ADL weighs in with a bit of a muted press release (adl.org/PresRele/SupremeCourt_33/6050_33.htm). They're "disappointed":
The law increases the legal risks for businesses that employ undocumented workers but fails to provide sufficient \safeguards to protect those workers against unlawful treatment. It undermines federal efforts to balance discrimination concerns with control of illegal immigration.
The Arizona law also requires state use of E-Verify – a federal pilot program that allows employers to verify the eligibility of newly-hired employees – even though the program relies on records that are prone to error. That is one reason Congress has decided to hold off on making participation in the program mandatory.
Although the Court has upheld Arizona's law, we hope other states will show greater concern for the potentially discriminatory impact such laws can have, and choose not to follow Arizona's lead.
And, I hope they do follow Arizona's lead. We'll see how that works out; I tend to think several will.
Janet Murguia of the National Council of La Raza has written a letter to the Service Employees International Union congratulating them on their 90th anniversary. In it she gives a shout-out to their International Secretary Treasurer Eliseo Medina and commends them for their work on comprehensive immigration reform, aka amnesty. (Note: see all those links for background information).
She also references how the SEIU "recognized early on that their membership was changing and growing more diverse". In other words, the SEIU realized that all those illegal aliens could be organized to form a power base, no matter their impact on the American workers with whom they were in competition. The SEIU is indirectly profiting from illegal activity: they gladly take union dues from those who are working in contravention to our laws. Oddly enough, that didn't make it into Murguia's note (seiu.org/2011/04/nclrs-murguia-on-seiu-90th.php):
On behalf of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) familia, I would like to congratulate SEIU on its 90th Anniversary. NCLR values its long partnership with SEIU. Together, we have worked to fix our broken immigration system, improve working conditions and the quality of life for all of America's workers, and empower the many in our nation whose voices have all too often been ignored.
SEIU has been a pioneer in the labor movement when it comes to the Latino community. Their visionary leadership recognized early on that their membership was changing and growing more diverse. What they did with that recognition should serve as a model for not only the labor movement but for other institutions in American society.
SEIU invested significant resources in reaching out and serving this growing constituency. They made Latinos a key part of the union's decision-making leadership such as our good friend colleague, SEIU's International Secretary Treasurer, Eliseo Medina. And they made the critically important decision to focus their efforts beyond just their membership to helping the entire Latino community advance.
When the Latino community has needed SEIU, they have been there. For nearly a decade, SEIU has been at the center of the effort to enact comprehensive immigration reform. When Latino organizations called for a boycott of Arizona in the wake of the notorious racial profiling law, SB 1070, SEIU joined the fight. And SEIU joined with NCLR and others last November in releasing a poll on the Latino vote to ensure that neither party neglects or writes off the Latino community.
As the recent 2010 Census numbers clearly demonstrate, SEIU was ahead of its time in realizing the importance of the Latino community to America's future. But as our continued challenges also clearly demonstrate, there will continue to be a need for our organizations to work together to address the critical needs of all our communities, protect all of America's workers, and strive for justice for all those who call our country home.
The National Council of La Raza has sent an open letter  to senators Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell urging them to pass the anti-American DREAM Act. That bill would let the illegal aliens covered by it take college resources from Americans: it would deprive some Americans of college educations. And, the NCLR's letter is misleading and signed by a small grab bag of very questionable people.
As Latino leaders in government, business, entertainment, and sports, we urge members of Congress to support the "Development, Relief, and Education of Alien Minors (DREAM) Act." This modest and sensible piece of legislation would allow young people who were brought to the United States by their parents at a very young age to pursue higher education or serve in the military.
1. The DREAM Act ("DA") is a power grab by various forces: the Democratic leadership, religious leaders, the far-left, and so on. The NCLR letter makes clear that to a great extent it's a race-based power grab. Those signing on don't care about American citizens not being able to attend college; obtaining race-based power is a much higher priority.
2. The DA is hardly a "modest and sensible piece of legislation". It could cover one to two million illegal aliens, and those covered could eventually sponsor other family members. That would take many years, but it would happen. It would also encourage even more illegal immigration with others seeking to take part in a "DREAM Act 2". Passing one amnesty would give even more power to those who'd push for yet more amnesties in the future. So, it's hardly "modest".
3. There's no requirement that those covered would have had to have been brought here by their parents; some older children cross on their own. They have to have arrived here before they were sixteen, which is hardly "a very young age".
Then, the NCLR misleads about who'd be covered:
These students are success stories in their communities, serving as student body presidents, star athletes, and performers, graduating often with honors from schools in their hometowns.
Certainly, some are as described. However, the educational requirements in the bills are minimal; there are no requirements that those covered must have graduated with honors or anything similar.
In addition to a few minor celebrities, those signing on include (see each link for more on them):
* Janet Murguia of the NCLR
* Antonio Villaraigosa (former leader of a racial separatist group)
* Linda Chavez (sits or sat on boards of two large companies that employ large numbers of low-wage workers)
* Carlos Gutierrez (George W Bush Commerce Secretary who promoted amnesty while in office; see his name's link for much more)
* Lionel Sosa (wanted to and may have taken money from the Mexican government to promote amnesty inside the U.S.)
* Henry Cisneros (see the other letter he signed on to at the link)
* Maria Contreras-Sweet (affiliated with Promerica Bank)
* America Ferrera
* Monica Lozano
* Federico Pena
* Bill Richardson
* Solomon D. Trujillo (U.S.-born business executive who led an Australian company but who left that country in disgrace)
Group circulates list of 1300 supposed illegal aliens in Utah, a problematic, counter-productive waste of time - 07/13/10
An anonymous group [note: using the name Concerned Citizens of the United States] says it quietly watched Hispanics in their neighborhoods, schools, churches and "public welfare buildings" to compile a list of 1,300 people it says are illegal immigrants living in Utah. The group sent the list to law enforcement agencies and news media demanding that those named "be deported immediately." ...It is not known who produced the list, although Gov. Gary Herbert has called for an investigation to see if the list was compiled by someone with access to state databases containing personal information. The list contains birthdates, workplaces, addresses, phone numbers and social security numbers. Names of children are included. Several pregnant women have their exact due dates listed. All the names seem to be Hispanic.
1. This is highly counter-productive because it puts illegal aliens in the position where their advocates want them: as teary victims of racist oppressors.
2. Not all of those on the list might be here illegally; this raises the specter of other lists that have been used throughout history.
3. No one should expect officials to start deporting people just because they're on the list; in fact, the opposite might happen with politicians rushing to their defense.
4. It'd be surprising if they got all the information on the list legally, and state officials aren't going to give them a pass where they would give a pass in the opposite situation.
5. All the time spent on the list could have been spent on legitimate and highly-effective plans like question authority.
UPDATE: From this:
on Friday morning [July 16], Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff stood side-by-side with Paul Mero, of the Sutherland Institute, Catholic Bishop John Wester, state Sen. Ruz Robles, and representatives of the National Council of La Raza and the National Immigration Forum.
This site tries to discredit the last two groups; those who leaked the list helped them. Some of the fault of this lies with various political leaders; instead of promoting plans like question authority, they promote ineffective or low-wattage activities.
7/31/10 UPDATE: "The List" continues to help far-left supporters of illegal immigration. On Friday, 121 groups sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security asking them to denounce the list and refuse to use it (link). Those behind the letter include the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Council of La Raza, Human Rights Watch, FamiliesUSA, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, and other religious groups.
The National Council of La Raza and others  recently released a poll  making the claim that 70% of Latinos "strongly oppose" the new Arizona immigration law, with 11% in the "somewhat oppose" camp. Their findings are a bit questionable considering the results to the first question "What do you think are the most important issues that
President Obama and the Congress should address over
the next year?" Respondents were allowed to choose two of these:
Fix the economy 22%
Health Care 17%
Create more jobs 13%
War on terror 4%
Banking reform 2%
Those results seem more than a bit questionable; for instance, why did an important topic like education only get 5%? Why is immigration far and away their top issue when other polls have shown markedly different results? Did the NCLR's partners pre-select people in order to obtain the desired outcome? (I have no evidence to support that, but it's not like I'd put it past them.)
In addition, the NCLR once again showed how willing they are to engage in racial divisiveness by asking "If most of the immigrants in Arizona where White Europeans, this law would not have been passed". 76% took the race bait, only 21% disagreed. For a discussion of the implications of questions like that, see the all illegal aliens white page.
NCLR, LULAC, SEIU, UFCW, etc. launch boycott of Arizona over immigration law (+Al Sharpton) - 05/06/10
A whole host of far-left illegal immigration profiteers today launched an organized boycott of Arizona over that state's new immigration law (nclr.org/content/news/detail/63211). See the last link for our extensive coverage of that law, and see each of the following links for our coverage of the groups. Those participating include:
Shortly after Twitter introduced lists, I made a few as an experiment . One was called "The other side" (twitter . com/24AheadDotCom/the-other-side) which at post time is blank. However, it used to have tweets from @NCLR, and I was going to eventually get around to adding other groups. I don't think I ever sent a tweet to @NCLR, so apparently the only thing NCLR didn't appreciate was being added to that list.
Obama meets with black leaders on unemployment, Hispanic leaders on amnesty (+Graham, Schumer) - 03/11/10
[At a White House meeting earlier today] African-American members of Congress said they told the president that job creation is critical to their communities and that federal resources should be directed toward workforce training, specifically for infrastructure projects.
Unemployment among black Americans was 15.8 percent in February, compared to the overall jobless rate of 9.7 percent nationally.
"We talked about the desperation that we're feeling in our communities throughout the country," Democratic Representative Barbara Lee, head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said on the White House driveway with a phalanx of other lawmakers beside her...
[At a different meeting also earlier today,] Obama spent an hour meeting with officials from immigration advocacy groups who pressed him on an issue that did not feature highly in the president's first year, which was dominated by fixing the economy and healthcare.
"We leave the meeting today feeling hopeful," said Clarissa Martinez de Castro of the National Council of La Raza. "The president took an hour of his time to have a conversation, not to give a speech and that is significant."
She said that "there were commitments made about truly seeing this issue moving forward and the White House getting engaged to help in that process."
Although details of their blueprint were not released, Graham said the elements included tougher border security, a program to admit temporary immigrant workers and a biometric Social Security card that would prevent people here illegally from getting jobs.
Graham also said the proposal included "a rational plan to deal with the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States." He did not elaborate on what the plan would be. But in a recent interview, he suggested that onerous measures were unrealistic.
"We're not going to mass-deport people and put them in jail, nor should we," Graham said. "But we need a system so they don't get an advantage over others for citizenship."
"Temporary" Protected Status for Haitian illegal aliens pushed by profiteers (Haiti earthquake) - 01/14/10
[TPS has been approved; see the update below]
Yesterday, Janet Napolitano of the Department of Homeland Security suspended repatriations of illegal aliens from Haiti; that makes some sense as long as it's actually temporary. What doesn't make sense are the calls from some to give "Temporary Protected Status" in the U.S. to Haitian illegal aliens. The word "temporary" is generally a misnomer as that status is renewed over and over.
TPS would be an infected band-aid that wouldn't fix Haiti's structural problems and in some cases would result in importing Haiti's problems into the U.S. It would also result in brain-draining that country of its more energetic citizens, making things easier for corrupt Haitian leaders. These pushing TPS are at root simply self-serving: they're interested in little more than obtaining political power. They're thinking only of themselves instead of trying to solve problems; they're only making the long-term situation worse.
"Well, we have, as you know, many Haitian Americans. Most are here legally. Some are not documented. And the Obama administration is taking steps to make sure that people are given some temporary status so that we don’t compound the problem that we face in Haiti."
Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, both Democrats, and (Representatives Lincoln Diaz Balart and Mario Diaz Balart) of south Florida, both Republicans, as well as John C. Favalora, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Miami... "If this is not a slam-dunk case for temporary protected status, I don’t know what is," said Kevin Appleby, a spokesman for the bishops. He said the status would allow Haitian immigrants here to work here and send money back to relatives in Haiti trying to recover from the quake.
Appleby's proposal is at heart immoral: he would encourage Haiti to become even more dependent on the U.S. than they already are and he would embed that dependence in their society, instead of encouraging them to develop their own commerce.
The letter from Senators encouraging TPS is here; in addition to Gillibrand and Schumer, the signatories are: John Kerry, Paul Kirk, Jeff Bingaman, Bill Nelson, Dick Durbin, Frank Lautenberg, Chris Dodd, Bob Menendez, Pat Leahy, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Harkin, Bob Casey, and Bernie Sanders.
(The Florida politicians including Ileana Ros Lehtinen) are among several leaders holding separate news conferences in Miami on Thursday to draw further attention to the issue. Others include the head of the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, who will be accompanied by Edwidge Danticat, a celebrated Haitian author and winner of a MacArthur Fellow "genius" grant. Twenty-six refugee agencies also sent a joint letter Thursday urging Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to consider TPS for Haitians, and the National Council of La Raza released a statement to the same effect.
That also contains Mark Krikorian seeming to support TPS in this case, as well as this:
"When somebody works here they can support up to 10 times that number back in Haiti. So we're talking about supporting hundreds of thousands of people in Haiti at no cost to U.S. taxpayers," (Steve Forester, a Miami-based advocate with the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti) said.
Obviously, he's either trying to mislead people or he can't think things through. Many or most of the jobs they'd be doing would be jobs that Americans who are drawing unemployment insurance could be doing, and much of the labor those Haitians would be doing in the U.S. would be heavily subsidized.
"We are considering all alternatives available to us in extending a helping hand to Haiti," (Alejandro Mayorkas of the USCIS) said. He confirmed those considerations include temporary protected status for Haitians.
And, Reform Immigration for America is also promoting TPS with a petition drive: reformimmigrationforamerica.org/blog/blog/
The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society has joined with several other groups in calling for TPS:
Likewise with Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform:
"It is in the foreign policy interest of the United States and a humanitarian imperative of the highest order to have all people of Haitian descent in a position to contribute towards the recovery of this island nation."
See the comments above.
1/15/10 UPDATE: Janet Napolitano has now approved TPS, but only for those illegal aliens who were here on Tuesday. How they'll be able to tell isn't clear; some people will no doubt try to provide fake documentation showing they were here at that time.
Janet Murguia of the National Council of La Raza takes to the pages of Alternet to offer "Dobbs' Resignation Was Long Overdue" (alternet.org/story/144089/dobbs'_resignation_was_long_overdue). Somewhat surprisingly, it doesn't seem to contain any outright lies, just smears and misleading statements. For instance, she tries to blame an increase in hate crimes on Dobbs and others:
The rhetoric that Lou and other extreme commentators used surrounding the debate took a harsh turn, so much so that a member of my staff called it a "wave of hate" and said that "this no longer sounds like it's about policy - it sounds like it's about us." ...This is not just an exercise in etiquette. The Latino community knows all too well the effect of extreme and polarizing rhetoric. Over the past five years, the vitriolic debate surrounding immigration has created a toxic climate for our communities. During that time, we have seen a double-digit increase in the number of hate crimes against Latinos and substantial growth in the number of hate groups targeting Latinos.
The number of "hate groups" is based on the opinion of the Southern Poverty Law Center, not exactly a credible source.
Then, she implies that the NCLR and other illegal immigration-supporting groups are going to go after other hosts:
Yet Dobbs is not alone in purveying extreme rhetoric on the subject of immigration. There are dozens of others on cable television news and radio who draw our ire. Given the free speech issues that we regularly defend, we have attempted to approach this issue with restraint. We have appealed to the journalistic integrity of the cable networks and requested balance. We have worked with advertisers who have a right to ensure that their brands are not associated with such polarizing debate. And we have used the airwaves to identify patterns of distortion and established a website (www.WeCanStopTheHate.org) to call out the worst offenders so that the public can add its voice to the debate.
The actions of the NCLR show clearly that they have no interest in a real debate about these issues.
On his Monday radio show, Lou Dobbs announced that a few weeks ago someone shot at his house while his wife was just 15 feet away. And, that followed a series of threatening phone calls; the state police are currently investigating. Audio of his broadcast is attached, and a partial transcript (via this) is at .
A group of far-left organizations have created "Health Equity for All" (healthequityforall.org) to push for "universal health care reform". And, they're doing it from an explicitly race-based standpoint and being quite explicit about their attempts to gain race-based power.
Fearful that they're losing ground on immigration and health care, a group of House Democrats is pushing back and arguing that any health care bill should extend to all legal immigrants and allow illegal immigrants some access.
..."Legal permanent residents should be able to purchase their plans, and they should also be eligible for subsidies if they need it. Undocumented, if they can afford it, should be able to buy their own private plans [even on the proposed Exchange]. It keeps them out of the emergency room," said Rep. Michael M. Honda, California Democrat and chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus...
Mr. Honda told The Washington Times that he's not pushing for illegal immigrants to gain access to taxpayer-subsidized benefits. "That's an argument that's been done already," he said.
The two letters are at house.gov/apps/list/press/ca15_honda/Health_090923.html however I wasn't able to find a list of those signing on; if anyone can do that leave a comment.
The article also mentions this:
The National Council of La Raza launched its own "flood their voice mail" campaign last week to put pressure on (Sen. Max Baucus) to expand coverage in his proposal to include all legal immigrants and to drop verification language in the legislation that would prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining coverage.
Drop Dobbs: illegal activity-supporting racial power groups and far-left want Lou Dobbs off CNN - 09/17/09
A coalition of illegal immigration-supporting far-left and/or racial power groups has launched a campaign called "Drop Dobbs" to get advertisers to pull their ads from CNN's Lou Dobbs show (dropdobbs.com, mediamatters.org/blog/200909150031): "...The effort aims to let companies know that their continued financial support of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight makes them complicit in the hate speech and wild conspiracy theories that he promotes..."
Campaigns like this - following on the heels of the somewhat successful similar campaign against Glenn Beck - stand a greater chance of success given the fact that Dobbs' ratings aren't as high as they once were. What you can do about this is raise awareness about the groups involved and cut them off from support, both financial and ideological.
For instance, help organize a campaign against bills that would fund the NCLR. Or, do something as simple (but too difficult for some) as leaving comments at blog and news postings by or discussing the groups; those comments should have the goal of discrediting those groups or their supporters.
See the following links to the names of the groups involved for our coverage of each group:
* National Council of La Raza (funds extremists, gave award to someone who'd proposed genocide)
* League of United Latin American Citizens (CA chapter thinks U.S.-Mexico border might be invalid)
* Southern Poverty Law Center (misled about hate crime statistics)
* Media Matters for America
* Frank Sharry
* Reform Immigration for America
* Center for New Community
* Hispanic Institute (see below)
* Dolores Huerta Foundation (promoted demographic hegemony, hatred against Republicans)
* National Hispanic Media Coalition
* National Puerto Rican Coalition
* New Democratic Network
* Netroots Nation (from Dailykos and others)
* Voto Latino
UPDATE: Janet Murguia of the NCLR says, among other things (huffingtonpost.com/janet-murguia/join-nclr-and-the-drop-do_b_290584.html):
For two years, I have tried working behind the scenes with CNN to bring some fairness to the relentless bias of CNN programming due to Dobbs' show... The Drop Dobbs coalition is compiling a list of those advertisers supporting the Lou Dobbs show and will be reaching out to educate them about this issue. We recognize that many advertisers may be unaware that FAIR has been designated as a hate group, so we are contacting those companies before publicly releasing the list. However, unless and until Dobbs and CNN disassociate themselves from this hate group, we will be asking advertisers to withhold their support...
UPDATE 2: See also the similar group "Enough is Enough!". Communications for that are being handled by a DNC official; it would be interesting to know to what extent if any the Obama administration is involved in either group. Could someone (perhaps Judicial Watch) file some FOIA requests?
The Hispanic Institute's board is at thehispanicinstitute.net/about/boardofdirectors. In addition to one board member who was with the National Association of Realtors, another is quite interesting:
Napolitano immigration meeting: you weren't represented (vast # of loose borders groups, Obama/Janet anti-287g) - 08/20/09
Earlier today, Janet Napolitano of the Department of Homeland Security held a closed-door meeting with a group of what she calls "stakeholders" (dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1250792978709.shtm) but was actually a vast pantheon (see below) of far-left, racial power, corrupt business, and in general loose borders groups all of which want some form of comprehensive immigration reform, aka amnesty. There were at least 98 participants in the meeting, and none of them represent your interests or the interests of the great majority of American citizens. Why exactly they'd hold the meeting isn't clear; aside from guest workers and minor details they're all pretty much on the same page. Perhaps it was a strategy session to see how they could fool as many people as possible whenever they decide to push for amnesty.
The President said specifically that when it comes to the local police charged with enforcing federal immigration law under 287(g) agreements that he wants these local law enforcement agencies held accountable.
Noorani’s other question concerned the 287g program, which gives local law enforcement the authority to enforce immigration law. Noorani asked Napolitano to revoke the authority of agencies who have clearly violated the spirit of the agreement, and that the immigration reform community looked forward to seeing that happen. Napolitano responded, “Me, too.”
Other statements from those attending the meeting are here. Here's the intro to the DHS's press release:
"Today’s meeting on comprehensive immigration reform was an important opportunity to hear from stakeholders and build on the significant time I’ve spent on the Hill meeting with members of Congress on this critical subject. I look forward to working with President Obama, my colleagues in Congress and representatives from law enforcement, business, labor organizations, the interfaith community, advocacy groups and others as we work on this important issue.”
UPDATE: Griswold of CATO weighs in with a slab of Policy-As-Highschool (cato-at-liberty.org/2009/08/21/the-president-drops-by-to-tout-immigration-reform). After Napolitano gave her "opening remarks we broke up into smaller roundtable discussions of about 15 people each moderated by DHS officials". They then reconvened and Napolitano discussed what they'd learned. Then, Obama entered the building and made his speech "about 20 feet from where I was sitting". Griswold also refers to himself as a "small fish"; he's much too modest since he was some kind of inspiration for Bush's 2004 anti- and un-American guest workers plan.
And, there are so many groups that I've split the list into two parts. The religious, union, city/police, and miscellaneous groups are here. The following has the major groups, the business groups, and the single libertarian:
George Soros has contributed $5 million to the group Health Care For America Now (healthcareforamericanow.org) so that they can push Obamacare. That's dwarfed by the $35 million he's giving to help/"help" children in New York (in partnership with the federal government, ). As discussed here, HCAN is considered a bit on the wimpy side by the far-left, such as Jane Hamsher. That's despite HCAN including some true "liberal" stalwarts. Their steering committee includes the following:
* AFL CIO
* American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
* Campaign for Americas Future
* Center for American Progress Action Fund
* Campaign for Community Change (part of Center for Community Change)
* National Council of La Raza
* National Education Association
* Service Employees International Union
* United Food and Commercial Workers(UFCW)
Other members include: League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), National Abortion Federation (abortion doctors association), National Korean American Service and Education Consortium (NAKASEC), Brave New Films, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), Gamaliel, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Rock the Vote, USPIRG, MDI Imported Car Service of Maine (?!?), and the YWCA.
 By giving the state of New York $35 million, Soros will trigger matching federal funds - from the stimulus - of $140 million (link):
Soros' gift and the matching government funds will provide 850,000 children currently receiving public assistance and food stamps in New York State with $200 each for back-to-school supplies and other necessities... Soros emphasized the need to give the children a grant with "no strings attached," even if it does not guarantee the money is used as intended.
Probably only a small portion will go towards back-to-school supplies.
Janet Murguia of the National Council of La Raza takes to the pages of the Huffington Post to offer "There They Go Again: Tom Tancredo, Mark Krikorian and the Politics of Hate and Fear" (huffingtonpost.com/janet-murguia/there-they-go-again-tom-t_b_251584.html). See the earlier National Council of La Raza promotes radical groups for the backstory. She says:
Krikorian of CIS joined in yesterday trying to give Tancredo's rant some credence by harping on the term "La Raza," as in "The National Council of La Raza." Both Tancredo and CIS claim this term translates pejoratively into "The Race" instead of "the people" or "the community" as we use it (not unlike the way the Navajo use the term "the Dine"). Instead of quoting the man who coined the term, former Mexico Secretary of Education José Vasconcelos, who spoke of "La Raza Cósmica" as an ethnicity that welcomes diversity, CIS quotes others who claim a more sinister agenda is afoot.
Would, say, a Swede ever be eligible to be considered "Raza", "Dine", or part of the "Raza Cosmica"? Somehow I don't think so. In Mexican-American communities it's abundantly clear who's "raza" and who isn't, and it's a racial or at least ethnic signifier: someone is either "raza" or not depending on... ta da... their racial characteristics. And, while I'm sure sometimes exceptions are made, in order to join the Navajo tribe you would have to prove that you have Navajo blood.
In brief, Murguia's "community" is a gated one, depending on someone's race (or a mixture of races). Her "diversity" doesn't include those who don't have the "right" races/ethnicities in their backgrounds.
She also briefly mentions one of the core parts of Tancredo's article: the fact that the NCLR is promoting extremist groups. See the backstory link above for the details. Oddly enough, she just says that's been answered in their "The Truth about NCLR" article available from nclr.org without explaining why her group is promoting someone who joined the Brown Berets while in the sixth grade and why her group is promoting MEChA chapters including one that wants to "liberate" "Aztlan".
The National Council of La Raza bills itself as "the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States" who works through "its network of nearly 300 affiliated community-based organizations."
Among these affiliates are several chapters of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan) who La Raza helps fund. Aztlan is what radical "Mechistas"—as they refer to themselves on La Raza’s website—call the American Southwest, which they claim still belongs to Mexico. Their slogan is "Por La Raza todo, Fuera de La Raza nada" meaning "For The Race everything, outside the Race nothing." One chapter says on La Raza’s site that their mission is "empowerment of our gente and the liberation of Aztlan."
La Raza receives tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to set up charter schools like the Aztlan Academy of Tucson where they fly the Mexican Flag, but not the American Flag and teach students "Aztec Math."
See the link for some of his citations, and the "liberation of Aztlan" group is promoted at lideres.nclr.org/content/groups/detail/2308. In addition to that call, they also include the MEChA logo of an eagle holding a stick of dynamite and a war club. See also lideres.nclr.org/content/article/detail/1743 where they promote someone who joined a Brown Berets group while in the sixth grade; they're even more extreme than MEChA. And, right there on the right in that section: the logos of some of the NCLR's corporate sponsors: Allstate, Best Buy, MetLife, and Sodexo. Note also that the NCLR claims not to support separatism at nclr.org/section/separatist. So much for that.
NCLR: universal healthcare should include illegal aliens; Janet Murguia's transparent plea - 06/22/09
Via this, the National Council of La Raza has issued a new, completely transparent plea to include illegal aliens in universal healthcare (nclr.org/content/news/detail/57979). They're "strongly urg[ing] President Obama and Congress to make every effort to ensure that health care reform reaches all communities", and they don't want there to be any citizenship or related eligibility testing. They also make this statement:
No single community stands to gain as much from this important debate as Latinos. In the U.S., one out of every three uninsured persons and roughly 40% of all uninsured children are Latino. NCLR stands for health care reform that makes coverage affordable and accessible for everyone - all families and all children.
The NCLR keeps making statements against their own interest; just last month they discussed how poorly Latinos are performing in school. That and the above would seem to be strong arguments against massive immigration from Latin America, yet what the NCLR wants would incentivize such immigration.
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights supports illegal immigration, misleads about hate crimes (SPLC, MALDEF, ADL, NCLR, NHMC...) - 06/19/09
The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights has released a new report called "Confronting the New Faces of Hate: Hate Crimes in America 2009" . It's the latest salvo in the attempt by several far-left groups to support massive illegal immigration and to silence their critics. They name-check several of those groups, but their exact involvement in the report isn't clear; the mentions might just be boilerplate.
For just one example of how the LCCR is attempting to mislead, see the attached picture. The ominous-looking graph on the top (from the LCCR) shows anti-Hispanic hate crimes from 2003 to 2007. The graph on the bottom (created by me) uses the same data set, but shows earlier years. Note that 2001 was higher than 2007. And, note also that neither chart are adjusted for population. If that were done, the bottom chart would show that such crimes have actually declined as a percentage of the Hispanic population from 1995. About their misleading chart, they say:
The increasing number of shrill anti-Immigration reform commentaries from high profile national media personalities, including CNN's Lou Dobbs and Talk Show Network's The Savage Nation host Michael Savage, correlates closely with the increase in hate crimes against Hispanics.
The LCCR isn't just confused about correlation not equaling causation, they also don't explain what was happening in 2001; Dobbs had just returned to CNN and was hosting Moneyline. He didn't start his anti-illegal immigration show until 2003.
Another of their targets is FAIR, and they trot out an SPLC report and the usual smears, prefacing their SPLC excerpt with:
The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) have become increasingly concerned about the virulent anti-immigrant and anti-Latino rhetoric employed by a handful of groups and coalitions that have tried to position themselves as legitimate, mainstream advocates against illegal immigration in America.
Whether those groups were involved in this report or are just mentioned in a misbegotten attempt to give the report credibility isn't known. Later, they also quote Alex Nogales of the National Hispanic Media Coalition.
Kristin Collins of the Raleigh, North Carolina News & Observer offers "La Raza drawn into debate/Sotomayor is a former member" (link), about Sonia Sotomayor's membership in the NCLR. If you trust Collins' reporting, please compare her report to my extensive summary of that group on the National Council of La Raza page. You'll discover a large number of things Collins didn't tell you; whether that's because she's completely gullible or because she's in on the game isn't known, but in either case her journalistic skills are questionable.
The article might be an indication that the NCLR (or even the Obama administration) is concerned that Sotomayor's six-year membership in that group might become an issue. In any case, their board chairwoman Andrea Bazan attempts to spin their name (see this for a response) and what they do:
"People that have worked with NCLR know it as a leading group that works across races and across communities."
I'm sure they abide by all relevant discrimination laws, but at the same time their entire focus is sharply concentrated on Hispanics, including foreign citizens who are here illegally. For an example of that focus, see this. This is the second time recently I've seen them say something like that, and obviously being portrayed as discriminatory is a concern to them.
They're also spinning Sotomayor's involvement with that group:
NCLR officials say Sotomayor paid the group's $35 yearly dues and received its newsletters from 1998 to 2003 and has not been involved since.
Whether that's accurate or not isn't known; when a member of the PRLDEF board she was quite involved and it doesn't seem likely that she treated her membership in the NCLR just as she would a magazine subscription.
Janet Murguia of NCLR gets Mexican government's highest award for foreigners; Sarukhan promotes Latino voting, participation - 06/08/09
Back on May 5, the Mexican government gave their highest award for foreigners - the "Ohtli Award" - to Janet Murguia of the National Council of La Raza. That award is basically given to putative Americans who help the government of Mexico push their agenda inside the U.S.; a list of past winners is here. Per Google's accurate translation, those awards:
recognize the contribution of the winners to the empowerment of Mexican communities and Mexican-American in United States (que reconocen la contribución de los galardonados al empoderamiento de las comunidades mexicana y mexicano-americana en Estados Unidos)
The "Mexican community" in the U.S. includes a very large percentage of those here illegally, and as can be seen from the NCLR link above Murguia tries to help them in every way possible.
And, echoing comments they've made before, Mexico wants their citizens inside our country to also help push their agenda. Not only that, but they sound like our own homegrown political hacks (original at ):
"Nine percent of those who went to the polls on that day were identified as" Latinos "and this sector of the electorate was a decisive factor in the country in key states where the contest was closed, said Sarukhan.
The Ambassador encouraged the communities of Mexico and Mexican-Americans to increase their participation in public life of the country and strengthen their education and level of civic organization, to further enrich the vitality political, economic, cultural and social development of the United States.
DHS Southwest Border Task Force includes NCLR chairwoman, recipient of award from Mexican government, more - 06/08/09
The Reform Immigration for America group recently suggested that one part of "reform" should include the formation of an advisory council to make recommendations on dealing with border issues. The Department of Homeland Security's new "Southwest Border Task Force" (dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1244145382319.shtm) shows how that would work.
Does Janet Murguia of NCLR oppose apprehending criminal illegal aliens? (calls those raids "un-American") - 06/04/09
That's the impression I'm getting from this:
"For far too long, we have allowed a can’t-do minority to block progress and manipulate this issue to tear our country apart, but the urgency for reform is clear: economically, practically, and morally,” said NCLR president Janet Murguia. "Policies that call for SWAT-like teams to pluck people out of their beds in the middle of the night, lead to racial profiling, separate families, exploit workers, and ignore due process are shamefully un-American."
I read the last bit as independent statements: she's opposed to each of those individually. For instance, "SWAT-like teams" and "exploit[ing] workers" have nothing in common, strongly implying that she's opposed to the SWAT part independent of the rest.
So, that means she's opposed to things like this, this, and this or apprehending the people on this list: ice.gov/pi/investigations/wanted/fugitives.htm. Either that, or she's living in a fantasy world where people like that can be arrested without "SWAT-like teams". Is there any form of immigration law enforcement that Murguia and the National Council of La Raza would not try to monkeywrench?
Harry Reid says want immigration "reform" this year; NCLR, MALDEF; business-friendly guest worker plan; promotes unrealistic chain migration - 06/04/09
"As far as I’m concerned, we have three major issues we have to do this year, if at all possible: No. 1 is healthcare; No 2 is energy, global warming; No. 3 is immigration reform... It’s going to happen this session, but I want it this year, if at all possible... ...We need (a guest workers plan not just in agriculture but) in the food industry; we need it in the tourism [business]
Aside from a massive guest worker plan, the rest of what the article says he outlined was the standard compehensive immigration reform. Whether they'll have the time to make Reid's wishes come true remains to be seen.
He also spoke at an event celebrating Asian-American Pacific Islander Heritage Month (link), where he also promoted reform and made various misleading statements:
"Finally, we will again pursue comprehensive immigration reform that respects both our nation’s laws and the people from all nations who want to live in America, work hard and pay their fair share of taxes. And it is critical that we bring families together by cutting down on the long waits for prospective immigrants trying to join their immediate family members in the United States. I am committed to reforming our system in a way that is tough, fair and practical."
He's not only promoting chain migration, he's doing so in a completely unrealistic fashion. Any form of legalization would either have a very delitirious impact on those "prospective immigrants" or would result in thousands of criminals and even some terrorists being legalized. See the immigration line summary for the details.
One would think that a group that gave an award to someone who'd proposed genocide wouldn't have much of a chance at beating their opponents. Yet, the National Council of La Raza is in the lucky position that most of their leading opposition doesn't have a clue about that organization or doesn't have a clue about the best way to oppose them.
(For those curious, the way to oppose them is simple: just tell the truth. See the extensive summary of their activities at the last link.)
"Reform Immigration For America": business, labor, CAP, NCLR, CHIRLA begin new push; summit, townhall meeting; John Quigley - 06/01/09
A new group called "Reform Immigration For America" recently launched in order to push for comprehensive immigration reform, aka amnesty. They're a coalition of business, labor, and far-left/racial power groups; see their slick site here: reformimmigrationforamerica.org.