Author of Arizona immigration bill linked to White Power groups (Aztlan, multiculturalism)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In October 2006, Russell Pearce forwarded an email fromNational Alliance, a white separatist group, to a group of supporters. The email titled "Who Rules America criticized black and white intermixing and Jews in the media for promoting multiculturalism and racial equality, for depicting any racially conscious White Person" as a bigot, and for presenting the Holocaust as fact
Whether this is true or not is irrelevant. We have every right to protect our borders from illegal entry.
Absolutely.
By the way, here is his side of the story. I make no judgements either way because I don't know much about him. As chicagonut says, it's irrelevant to the bill except for those constantly using the tactic of personal attack versus arguing the merits of an issue.
"Pearce says he immediately sent two apologies to supporters after sending out the e-mail, claiming that he did not know what the group was and had not read the entire article before copying it into his e-mail.
"My heart is really hurt to think something like that would go out under my name," Pearce told The Republic today. "I was very embarrassed I didn't have better diligence and read the whole article."
"Pearce said he sent the e-mail and the article to a few dozen supporters in his Mesa legislative district. The subject line of the e-mail implored supporters to put out yard signs and get people they know out to vote.
He insists that he does not agree with the sentiments in the article, but that the title and the first paragraphs about media bias appealed to him. He said the article had been forwarded to him by someone else and he would not have sent it if he had read it in its entirety.
"It was one of those quick reactions and you wish you could dive in there and get it back," he said of the e-mail.
In his apology to supporters, he implores them to delete the original e-mail and not to forward it to anyone else.
"Ugly the words contained in it really are," he wrote in one of his apologies. "They are not mine and I disavow them completely. Worse still, the website links to a group whose politics are the ugliest imaginable. I am saddened and embarrassed that this went out with my name on it and I am also saddened at the loss of the friend who sent this to me. His heart is dark and I am unable to get him to see that what drives him is ugly and evil at its core."
Racism is wrong, period. I wouldn't condone Mr. Pearce's actions had he let his "supposed racism" get in the way of successfully doing his job as an American politician. However I am going to state pure and simple that this law, which mirrors federal law, is not racist. So long as he works in a constitutional way and doesn't interfere with the rights of American citizens black white Hispanic or other, then he can be a closet racist for all I care. (And I know everyone is going to debate this last sentence, which is pointless because we cannot argue the constitutionality of the bill until the federal judges look at it and decide for themselves, because their opinion is the only one which counts in this matter).
Had Russell Pearce written the bill as: Any subject who is brown, possesses a surname of Hispanic origin, or is visually of Hispanic descent will be questioned for their proof of citizenship. Failure to comply will result in immediate beating and deportation. - Thennnnnn I'd say something is fishy. But he and Kris Kobach drafted that bill to be as constitutional as possible.
It's funny because La Raza is a "brown power" group, but nobody seems to care that they hold a grudge against Caucasians for "stealing their land".
Racism, as surprising as it may be to you, can be done on both sides.
Racism is wrong, period. I wouldn't condone Mr. Pearce's actions had he let his "supposed racism" get in the way of successfully doing his job as an American politician. However I am going to state pure and simple that this law, which mirrors federal law, is not racist. So long as he works in a constitutional way and doesn't interfere with the rights of American citizens black white Hispanic or other, then he can be a closet racist for all I care. (And I know everyone is going to debate this last sentence, which is pointless because we cannot argue the constitutionality of the bill until the federal judges look at it and decide for themselves, because their opinion is the only one which counts in this matter).
It's funny because La Raza is a "brown power" group, but nobody seems to care that they hold a grudge against Caucasians for "stealing their land".
So forwarding an email about White Power, race mixing and the Holocaust is "supposed racism", yet a group promoting Brown power is definite racism. You expressed no concern with Pierce being a racist, so long as he works in a constitutional manner. Does La Raza work in an unconstitutional manner? Have they interfered with your rights? I guess White racists get a pass while any other racists don't.
Quote:
Racism, as surprising as it may be to you, can be done on both sides
If anyone is surprised about racism on both sides, it certainly is not me. I'm not the one stating that groups who support Brown supremacy are "supposed racists" I looked at the website of La Raza and have not found one statement about anyone stealing anyones land or about hating White people or racial segration, unlike Pierce. In fact they unequivocally denounce any form of segration or Reconquista.
So forwarding an email about White Power, race mixing and the Holocaust is "supposed racism", yet a group promoting Brown power is definite racism. You expressed no concern with Pierce being a racist, so long as he works in a constitutional manner. Does La Raza work in an unconstitutional manner? Have they interfered with your rights? I guess White racists get a pass while any other racists don't.
If anyone is surprised about racism on both sides, it certainly is not me. I'm not the one stating that groups who support Brown supremacy are "supposed racists" I looked at the website of La Raza and have not found one statement about anyone stealing anyones land or about hating White people or racial segration, unlike Pierce. In fact they unequivocally denounce any form of segration or Reconquista.
National Council of La Raza: Reconquista and Segregation (http://www.nclr.org/section/reconquista/ - broken link)
Here is my quote:
It's funny because La Raza is a "brown power" group, but nobody seems to care that they hold a grudge against Caucasians for "stealing their land".
Here is what you said:
So forwarding an email about White Power, race mixing and the Holocaust is "supposed racism", yet a group promoting Brown power is definite racism.
Can you please show me where I said that La Raza are DEFINITE RACISTS, as you claim? I am merely stating the irony that if somebody promotes White Power, they are branded HORRIBLE DEMONIC RACISTS, yet if a group promotes brown power then what they say is just them feeling pride for their race or culture? Nobody seems to go after racism on the minority side, just the white side.
The notion of AZTLAN exists, but La Raza knows if they blatantly sponsered it, they would maybe lose federal funding and would receive more backlash from Americans because of its extreme views. I am Hispanic and have seen other Hispanics believe in the notion of AZTLAN, so it wouldn't surprise me to see some people in La Raza believe this notion.
It's just like Russell Pearce. The man is supposedly a racist, according to the email, yet he won't announce publicly his support for White Power.
You seem to believe that racists are all KKK members who are going to lynch minorities. I find racists to be ignorant, but so long as you can do your job in an unbiased manner, then your views can be kept to yourself in private.
You also wrote:
Does La Raza work in an unconstitutional manner? Have they interfered with your rights? I guess White racists get a pass while any other racists don't.
Where did I say that? They have every right to sue, this is America after all. I never said they were unconstitutional. I never said white racists can get a pass over brown racists. I said all racism is ignorant, yet you assume that because I called Pearce a "supposed racist", meaning that there is no definitive proof that the man is a flaming bigot, that white people get a pass on racism? Please stop putting words in my mouth.
So forwarding an email about White Power, race mixing and the Holocaust is "supposed racism", yet a group promoting Brown power is definite racism. You expressed no concern with Pierce being a racist, so long as he works in a constitutional manner. Does La Raza work in an unconstitutional manner? Have they interfered with your rights? I guess White racists get a pass while any other racists don't.
If anyone is surprised about racism on both sides, it certainly is not me. I'm not the one stating that groups who support Brown supremacy are "supposed racists" I looked at the website of La Raza and have not found one statement about anyone stealing anyones land or about hating White people or racial segration, unlike Pierce. In fact they unequivocally denounce any form of segration or Reconquista.
National Council of La Raza: Reconquista and Segregation (http://www.nclr.org/section/reconquista/ - broken link)
I also have no use for racists on either side of this issue. So no, white racists don't get a pass. Did you actually think the the NCLR would make such statements on their website? It doesn't surprise me that they don't. What makes them racist is advocating for their ethnic brethern in this country illegally, period. That is an agenda that they don't deny.
....This is news? How? I thought that EVERYONE remotely in favor of the "Arizona Immigration Bill" was linked to White Power groups; in fact, I thought that just about everyone living legally in Arizona was somehow connected with White Power groups. I heard it's a HOTBED of White Power groups, and that we were all supposed to boycott the whole place....in fact, I heard that it isn't even safe to send a girls' basketball team there. It's worse than Communist China, from what I've heard....and you'd be safer traveling through Afghanistan than through Phoenix, if what I hear is true. 'Apartheid' is how I've heard the place described....and 'Joe Arpaio' seems to be just about as scary as Adolf Hitler, or so I'm told.
So now we hear that the author of the bill is connected with 'White Power groups'? And somehow is this news?....I thought this was a 'given'...Possibly I've missed something here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
