A few days ago I posted a piece (CELEBRATION, ANYONE?) that featured the following paragraph:

“Black History Month reminds me of that portion of an application form that asks for the race of the applicant; race is not supposed to matter but everyone knows that it does—especially to Liberal policy-makers and administrators. Despite the Civil War, a civil rights movement, several acts of congress, amendments to the constitution and ongoing preferential treatment Liberals are still convinced that new and institutionalized racism is the cure for past racism. They must believe that new injuries cure old injuries.”

The Census Bureau provides for us another example of the “Liberal policy-makers and administrators” that I wrote about in that paragraph. Question #8 of the 2010 census form asks: “Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?” If the answer is ‘yes’ there are several boxes for you choose from that identify the specific type of “Hispanic” that you are. Among the selections are “Mexican”, “Mexican Am.”, “Chicano” (Does anyone know which country “Chicanos” come from?), “Puerto Rican” and “Cuban”. By the way, can someone explain to me what the difference is between a “Mexican” and a “Mexican Am.”?

If you answer ‘no’ to question #8 question #9 then, allows you to declare what race you are. A few of the options include “White”, “Black”, “African Am.”, “Negro”, “American Indian”, “Chinese”, “Japanese”, “Filipino”, “Vietnamese” etc. Apparently none of these groups was special enough to merit a whole question just about them—they had to be lumped in with the “White” people. Let the healing begin!

The concept of being judged not be the color your skin but by the content of your character was a fundamental component of the Civil Rights movement that I once supported but, it is not a component of modern Liberal philosophy. Liberals are obsessed with race and skin color. I wouldn’t mind their obsession if they quietly kept it to themselves but, they keep forcing it on the rest of us. They’re not interested in simple equal protection of the law for all people. Instead, they want to engage in social engineering by redistributing wealth and bestowing rewards and preferences on some groups based upon their victim status and voting value to Liberal politicians.

If Liberals were really ‘liberal’ in the true meaning of the word they’d quit asking the rest of us intrusive and insulting questions that keep the nation racially divided. Leave us alone!

A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Attack on JD Hayworth was cheap shot

DeeDee Blase, a radical illegal immigrant activist, has issued a press release denouncing JD Hayworth, claiming to speak for Arizona’s Republican Hispanics. She does not. There is already an Arizona Latino Republican Association. Apparently they are not radical enough for her, so she went out and formed her own organization, composed of herself. Its primary purpose appears to be to bash other Republicans like Sheriff Arpaio who disagree with her open borders position. If you look at her press release closely, you’ll see there is no one listed on it, only “Communications” and info@somosrepublicans.com. Her website doesn’t list any officers on the “About Us” page. http://somosrepublicans.com/about It is telling that no Republican Hispanics other than DeeDee are willing to be officially associated with this organization. Her arguments against Hayworth are pretty bad. She dislikes ALIPAC, the immigration group that endorsed him, claiming they support something called “Operation Wetback.” But if you click on her link, it goes to a bulletin board on ALIPAC’s website where anyone can post comments. Someone posting a comment on their website about President Hoover’s roundup of illegal immigrants is not the same as ALIPAC endorsing the effort. DeeDee, that’s fine you’re supporting John McCain over JD Hayworth, you’ve been very vocal about your support of McCain in the past, and we’re now hearing that you may be working on the McCain campaign as a paid staffer. Did you mention that connection in your press release? Just don’t pretend to represent more than yourself, or other Republican Hispanics. You’re a one-woman show and just because the Arizona Republic gives you plenty of coverage because you bash other Republicans doesn’t entitle you to speak for other Republican Hispanics. Who elected you? Read her press release here – http://somosrepublicans.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Arizona-Hispanic-Republicans-Reject-JD-Hayworth.pdf

Whew! Black History Month ended just in time to give Americans—exhausted from a month of vigorous celebrating—time to recover. Promoters of Brown History Month, Yellow History Month, Red History Month, White History Month and Green History Month will continue to have to wait for a month of their own. There was a time when we celebrated the birthdays of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln in February but Liberals put an end to that (be warned, they’re still working on exterminating Christmas). I wonder what Barack Obama does during Black History Month—since he’s only half black maybe he only celebrates half the month?

Black History Month reminds me of that portion of an application form that asks for the race of the applicant; race is not supposed to matter but everyone knows that it does—especially to Liberal policy-makers and administrators. Despite the Civil War, a civil rights movement, several acts of congress, amendments to the constitution and ongoing preferential treatment Liberals are still convinced that new and institutionalized racism is the cure for past racism. They must believe that new injuries cure old injuries.

While we’re on the subject of needless celebrations maybe it’s time we resurrect one of the ancient celebrations and replace Black History Month with it. The Romans had some exciting ones to pick from and none of them have yet been ruined by Liberals. We could have it in February and best of all, all Americans could participate—not just the preferred few.

In attending my legislative district meeting last night, I heard from State Superintendent Tom Horne who told our group of a situation in the Tucson Unified School District of ethnic racist political correctness gone wild. The situation revolves around a teacher who has been continually harassed by the Ethnic Studies Department at Tucson High School (Do our high schools really need “Ethnic Studies Departments?”) I wanted to bring the letter to our reader’s attention in hope to put pressure on TUSD and support for the teacher(s) fighting this kind of workplace harassment and student indoctrination. Here is that email:

Mr. Horne;

My name is (name withheld for privacy concerns). I currently teach World History and American History to sophomores and juniors. I have been teaching at Tucson High for five years, and I am currently in my eighth year in TUSD. This week Tucson High begins the registration process for the 2010/2011 school year, and I have deep and strong concerns about the level of scholarly interpretation of our nation’s heritage in a number of classes that qualify as US History and US Government credit.

I have, during the last two years, been attacked repeatedly here at Tucson High by members of the Ethnic Studies department because I question the substance and veracity of their American History and Social Justice Government classes. I have been called racist by fellow Tucson High teachers, members of the Ethnic Studies department, and students enrolled in the departments’ classes. These charges come simply because I ask the department to provide the primary source material for the perspective they preach. The teachers of these classes not only refuse to stop the name-calling but openly encourage the students’ behavior. The curriculum advanced in these classes openly attacks the founding fathers, the European Judeo-Christian heritage of the founding fathers, as well as attacking the free market enterprises that created our economy and made it strong. These classes preach hatred and emphasize victimization and oppression by Western culture of minority peoples as well as base their lectures and assignments on outright lies concerning historical data in an effort to glorify socialism and demonize democracy and capitalism.

My letter to you is in the form of a question. Why are these classes given equal accreditation with American History and American Government classes? Many students are allowed to take these abominations in lieu of classes that center on essential American principles and history. Students in Ethnic Studies classes can go through high school in TUSD and NEVER learn about the history of the United States or its government in a way that would allow them to acknowledge the achievements and accomplishments in any positive sense. Often these students are completely ignorant of how the government works at all, yet they have a sense of entitlement coupled with offensive self-righteous belligerence. They congregate and protest but cannot articulate the issues at stake for them or for others.

In this era of reduced pay and endangered job security, I appeal to you and ask you to right this injustice. It is my belief all students in Arizona and in the country should be imbued with the concepts and traditions that make our country great.

Mr. Horne, I urge you to issue a directive or have the legislature consider a bill that mandates that all students in Arizona schools should be required to take American History and American Government. If students want to learn about their culture, they can take the extra class as an elective. As it is here at Tucson High, many students have only three to four classes their senior year and less than a full schedule their junior year.

If education is the key principle here, let students take an extra elective and stay in school longer to achieve the “balance” desired by this anti-American department.

Thank you.

Teacher (name withheld for privacy concerns)

During last night’s meeting Superintendent Horne noted that La Raza has been very involved in influencing TUSD policy with Adelita Grijalva, the daughter of liberal Democrat Raul Grijalva, playing a significant role setting policy as a member of the TUSD Governing Board.

In fact, TUSD has been pushing to expand its ethnic studies program. From the August 1st Arizona Daily Star, here is an article detailing that policy change:

TUSD to expand ethnic studies

By Rhonda Bodfield arizona daily star | Posted: Saturday, August 1, 2009 12:00 am | Comments

The Tucson Unified School District Governing Board this week agreed to expand the district’s ethnic-studies offerings, reduce racial disparities in how discipline is meted out and embark on a new marketing campaign in an effort to persuade a federal judge to lift a 31-year-old order requiring racial balance in TUSD schools.

Here’s what you need to know.

The plan hinges largely on an attempt to gently integrate schools by allowing them to develop specialized niches. More choices in instruction would presumably stimulate the voluntary movement of students across the district.

Among other changes called for in the roughly 70-page document are stronger efforts to make the teaching staff more diverse and increased recruitment of minority students for more challenging coursework.

The district’s finance staff had a hard time drawing up estimates but suggested it would cost about $1.5 million to provide seed money for the necessary training and capital improvements to launch the school-choice program. Transportation costs could jump from an anticipated $7.4 million this year to around $9.3 million. A marketing campaign would run roughly $500,000.

Meanwhile, it could cost $1.7 million to hire more teachers for gifted classes, if enrollment does expand. Ten percent increases in the Mexican-American Studies Department would bring it to $814,135, with African-American studies costing $1.2 million.

An internal compliance officer, plus support staff, would cost about $200,000. An external auditor would run $125,000.

Board member Mark Stegeman was the sole holdout on the plan, which passed on a 4-1 vote Thursday debate.

Stegeman said he was concerned about strong language in two parts of the plan dealing with ethnic studies and with discipline.

While he was clear to distance himself from Mexican-American Studies critics who testified at several public hearings on the plan, he said he was concerned about the cost of expanding ethnic studies overall when so many teachers were given pink slips and schools will go without librarians and counselors.

The plan states that the offerings will be “expanded as requested” by students each year — language which, if interpreted literally, could be sweeping. He said he didn’t think his colleagues would be comfortable making such promises in any other subject area.

And the fact that the plan dictates which schools will get new courses flies in the face of a shift toward greater control at each school site, he said.

Board member Adelita Grijalva, meanwhile, said she was concerned that the Mexican-American Studies Department wasn’t expanding enough. She questioned why, given that the district is 60 percent Latino, the department’s budget continues to be smaller than the African-American Studies Department.

Stegeman said his biggest concern was in the section calling for a decrease in student discipline referrals for black and Hispanic students starting with this school year. Stegeman said he was concerned that the language could lead to the unfair application of discipline.

Grijalva countered that there already is unfair application of discipline. Suspensions and expulsions are a contributing factor in juvenile detention, she said, noting minority youth are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system.

Their board counterpart, Bruce Burke, suggested that Stegeman was reading the language too technically, and that the board could apply common sense in fixing any unintended issues that arise.

U.S. District Judge David C. Bury should have the plan by Monday. Pleadings are expected to be filed, particularly since the plan still has more than a dozen points on which the district and the black and Hispanic plaintiffs could not agree.

Bury has not indicated when a final ruling might be expected.

On StarNet: Get more school and education news online at azstarnet.com/education

DID YOU KNOW

TUSD has been under a federal court order to desegregate since 1978, following a class-action lawsuit filed by Latino and black parents.

Officials agreed to bus students across the city, as well as to establish magnet schools to racially integrate the district. By creating magnet schools with specific entrance criteria and prescribed ethnic balances, TUSD sought to entice some of its top students to leave their neighborhoods and further create integrated schools.

U.S. District Judge David C. Bury first indicated in August 2007 that he’d release TUSD from the order — if the district could prove it has a plan to continue giving all students equal opportunities.

Horne’s office is currently working on a response to the teacher’s email request they received yesterday but has also re-issued a letter to the citizens of Tucson that originally went public in 2007 on the issue of ethnic studies in the Tucson Unified School District. Here is a link to Horne’s original letter. We are also aware of current legislation that will attempt to remedy the blatant racial indoctrination taking place in our public schools.

If you are aware of any additional incidents taking place in TUSD or any other public school across the state, we’d like to hear from you. Please leave your comments or contact Sonoran Alliance and the Superintendent Tom Horne’s office.

by Mark Flatten
Goldwater Institute
 
The operators of Tucson International Airport have scrapped the use of racial preferences in awarding concession contracts. That is in sharp contrast to efforts by the City of Phoenix to preserve race-based programs at Sky Harbor International Airport.
 
The Goldwater Institute reported in October that the Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) program at Sky Harbor has allowed lucrative airport concession leases to go to a small group of political insiders. The owners of companies deemed “disadvantaged” are often little more than a name on the lease, brought in to meet requirements for participation by minority and woman-owned businesses that are set by Sky Harbor officials.

Among the biggest beneficiaries of the program at Sky Harbor is Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, owner of a DBE-certified business which is part owner of a Chili’s restaurant franchise in Terminal 4.

Airport operators in both Phoenix and Tucson suspended their use of “race-conscious” methods after a 2005 federal court ruling required detailed disparity studies to justify using race as a factor in awarding concession contracts. If airport operators cannot meet their goals through race-neutral means, they can resort to “race-conscious” preferences based on race and gender, if they can prove those methods are necessary to offset the effects of discrimination.

Even though Tucson did not attempt to preserve the preference program it had been using before the court ruling, it still has a goal that 16 percent of airport concession sales will be attributed to firms owned by minorities and women. But airport operators will achieve that goal without resorting to preferences that take race or gender into account, according to Paula Winn, spokeswoman for the airport authority.

Phoenix, on the other hand, has gone to great expense to justify the preference program at Sky Harbor. Phoenix officials commissioned a disparity study in 2007 that to-date has cost taxpayers more than $600,000. The study results are due in December. While the study has been underway, Phoenix extended leases issued while race and gender preferences were in effect.

Regardless of the study results, on the 2010 election ballot Arizona voters will have their say in whether or not government offices can use race and gender preferences in contracting.
 
Mark Flatten is an investigative reporter for the Goldwater Institute.

Another example of biased journalism from the Republic. In a large feature article in yesterday’s paper, DeeDee Blase’s efforts to register Hispanics as Republicans was profiled. What the article completely omitted mentioning, however was that Blase represents the liberal wing of the Republican Party and not the average Hispanic Republican.  The article created the impression that Blase represents Hispanic Republicans.  She doesn’t.  The average Hispanic Republican generally supports enforcing our borders, and they are not focused on hatred for Sheriff Arpaio. Hispanics on the far left who have predominantly Democrat viewpoints may naturally take that position, but not the ones in the middle who Blase is trying to recruit. Most moderate or Republican Hispanics are reasonable and are not open borders advocates like Blase. Blase’s position on illegal immigration would be more at home in the Democrat Party.

One of the most active Hispanic Republicans in the Valley is Alice Lara, who sits on the Special Healthcare District Board. She was endorsed by both Sheriff Arpaio and County Attorney Thomas, and is an officer in the Arizona Latino Republican Association. She is more representative of Arizona’s Republican Latinos than Blase.  Blase’s approach is divisive, and would cut people out of the party instead of being inclusive, shrinking the party. It would also move the party further to the left.  Many Hispanics would be turned off by her criticism of Arpaio and Pearce. It is unfortunate that the Republic would choose to profile someone as radical as Blase as representative of Hispanic Republicans, instead of Lara. Lara has been active in the Valley political scene for years, as a former KFYI producer and current assistant to lobbyist Stan Barnes. Where did DeeDee Blase come from and has anyone heard of her? Blase calls her group Somos Republicans (somos in Spanish is the plural of “to be,” or “we are”).  It is telling that she didn’t join Arizona Latino Republicans, but formed her own group. She is likely too radical for ALRA.

One Hispanic friend of mine had this to say about the article:

Yes I saw the article – I do not agree with her illegal immigration stance.  I do not think our party should be defined around the dislikes of fellow Rs. We don’t have to be in love with each other but we have important common political philosophies to strengthen and it disturbs me to see misplaced compassion used in this way to further a personal agenda.

Her action in my opinion demonstrates/promotes/illustrates further division in the Republican party and more so in those who happen to be prospective Republican Hispanics.  This is America and there is room for all opinions.

I’m still shocked that a person as unfit and anti-American as Obama got elected president. He’s not just your average destructive Liberal. How did it happen? How did a closet-Muslim named ‘Barak Hussein Obama’ get elected? Was it the flaccidness of the Bush administration? Was it the uncompromising weakness of John McCain? Maybe those things contributed but, I think that real answer lies in the social conditioning  infused into our culture by our universities and pop culture over the last five decades—especially in the area of race relations.

A critical element of this conditioning is the untrue teaching that America is a “racist” nation and that black people are an oppressed group who are constantly being exploited by the greedy, white majority who ought to feel shame and guilt for the oppressions they inflict—even the unintended ones. The Liberal solution to these oppressions (after a hefty dose of guilt) are “Affirmative Action” programs—programs where blacks and other minorities are given preference in hiring and other areas over white applicants. That’s right, the same folks who insist that race shouldn’t matter want race to matter.

During the election I heard many a white Liberal say that “it is time our nation had a black president”. Like any Affirmative Action program the racial outcome is more important than the qualifications. All of these decades of conditioning have bestowed upon Obama a layer of protection never experienced by any previous president; just watch how many of his critics will continue to be labeled a “racist”.

You can bet that Hillary Clinton is one Democrat who isn’t enjoying this presidential Affirmative Action but other Liberals remain obsessed with racial issues. Why stop with the presidency? Let’s go whole hog. I think that every Democrat in congress should resign their seat in favor of a minority replacement. Let the healing begin!

Public Service Announcement:  ACORN is hiring canvassers for work in low income Phoenix neighborhoods.  Craigslist has the details.  Who knows, these may be the 2010 census takers in training.

Deja Vu all over again?

Arizona made pro-life history within the last few days when Governor Jan Brewer signed several major pro-life bills. After many hard-fought years, the pro-life community was finally successful in seeing three pieces of legislation passed. The legislation included a tightening of language related to partial birth abortion, parental consent and a woman’s right to know bill. Much of the credit goes to Cathi Herrod of the Center for Arizona Policy and Ron Johnson of the Arizona Catholic Conference. These bills have been in the works for many years but have always run into trouble with pro-abortion committee chairmen or a pro-abortion governor. This is one instance where I proudly salute Governor Jan Brewer for finally signing these bills into law. This is clearly a case where the law has finally caught up to the science and human rights have prevailed.

At the federal level, Congressman Trent Franks hosted a recent event on Capitol Hill in which he helped debut a documentary exposing the racists roots of the abortion industry. In a write-up in World Net Daily, Janet Porter (who will be here next month for the annual Arizona Right to Life Conference) writes that Congressman Franks has sponsored the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PReNDA) as part of an effort to educate those members of society who have been targeted by the abortion industry. Porter writes:

Watch the trailer of what may be the most powerful pro-life tool since “The Silent Scream”: “Maafa21.” It’s a two-hour movie that documents the racist beginnings of abortion and the continuation of that racist agenda to this day. The word Maafa in the movie’s title means: “African Holocaust” or the “Holocaust of Enslavement.” The 21 refers to this holocaust in the 21st century.

It was shown on Capital Hill a few weeks ago, and several staff members from the Black Caucus responded to the invitation. One left in tears. She said she came with one “mindset,” but was leaving with a changed life. She hadn’t realized just how committed the abortion movement was with the elimination of her race.

Here is the trailer to the documentary now making the rounds (hat tip to Seeing Red AZ)