Thursday, March 15, 2012

Diversity Thursday

"Sal, if the (D)iversity Bullies have their way, where does it locically wind up?"

That is a very easy answer. I don't have to play pretend - it is all unfolding right in front of you.

This has been a good week for what I have been blogg'n about every THU for years.

1970 thinking meets second decade of the 21st Century reality.

We have already covered in detail the prep-school raised, blond-haired, blue-eyed sons of major trial lawyers people clicking "Hispanic." We have Admirals - you can search this site for them if you wish for their sub-urban upper-middle class Wonderbread upbringing - who have laughable threads that connect them to their "minority" status - a laughable thread they have used from professional gain.

Back to the news of which I speak. There is so much goodness here - I just want to get nakid and roll around in it.
Compton City Councilwoman Janna Zurita owes her Hispanic last name to a grandmother from Spain, whom she never met. Zurita considers her mother black and said her father “wants to be black” even though he “looks Latino.”

Zurita, the mayor pro tem of Compton, sometimes jokes with her sister about their racial roots.

“She always tells me I look just like a Mexican: flat booty, straight hair. You know, just all kind of – how Mexicans used to look. You know, now they have big booties,” Zurita said in a legal deposition in November. “You know, little jokes about it.”

While Zurita takes a sometimes-playful approach to her racial identity, it became the serious subject of a recent lawsuit under the California Voting Rights Act. In January, a judge ruled that a trial would be necessary to figure out whether Zurita could be considered Latina and whether that means Latinos have a voice on the council.
Armed with 2010 census data, a network of attorneys is increasingly targeting local governments – from cities and school boards to hospital and community college districts – for not reflecting the demographics of their constituents.
(For the record: I am not implying rolling around nakid with Zurita; just the goodness of the schadenfreude. In any event - for those who know my actual Latin American predilections, it has nothing to do with flatness...)

That is where these the (D)iversity Bullies all wind up if they are not opposed. Poor Zurita, she is of the same ethnic groups as I am, "American" - thought the bean counters won't let her be.

She is as many are, multiracial.
In Compton, lawyers representing two Latina residents argued that Zurita is not Latina. Zurita, on the other hand, pointed to her election as evidence that Latinos are represented. But even she seemed conflicted during her deposition, at one point saying that she is Latina, at another point that she isn’t.

Asked point-blank by an opposing lawyer, Zurita replied, “I don’t think there is any pure races.”

The brouhaha over Zurita’s race “raises an issue that I believe is silent in the legislation, which is, how are you calculating ethnicity?” said Compton City Attorney Craig J. Cornwell. “Is it people who have Latino ancestry? Is it how a person self-identifies themselves?"

The U.S. Census doesn’t provide clear answers, because it considers being Hispanic or Latino separate from race. On government forms, Zurita sometimes marks black, sometimes “other” and couldn’t remember if she ever marked Latino.

Adding to the confusion, Zurita later referred to her Spanish grandmother as Mexican. The attorney sought to clarify: “So she was from Spain, but her heritage was Mexican?”

“Well,” Zurita replied, “you know, I don't know. All this Mexican, third generation, fourth generation, Latina, Latino – I just kind of refer to the group as Mexican.”

Regardless, Zurita maintained that she represents all residents of Compton, where 65 percent of the population is Hispanic.

“I don't even think race, you know,” she said. “I don't look at race.”
Sad, isn't it? Zurita, I don't look at race either - too bad our government doesn't. Read more at the link ... this is why we fight ... but let's move on.

... and of course, we must have our metrics!
In order to make sure gays and lesbians are adequately represented on the judicial bench, the state of California is requiring all judges and justices to reveal their sexual orientation. The announcement was made in an internal memo sent to all California judges and justices.
Both here and the link above - the steps the (D)iveristy Industry is taking continues to diverge from the fundamentals of a free society, but that shouldn't shock anyone. Their intellectual foundation is Cultural Marxism (look it up).

If there is one thing you can change even easier than your ethnicity (I know, in my family we have three + "other" to play around with) - it is your sexual preference. For some people, it changes over time (L.U.G. call your office) and no one should demand that they be stamped for life with one ... well, I don't think anyone should be branded. The (D)iversity Industry ... of course they can't have that. Privacy? Freedom? Individualism? Heavens no. They are all about breaking people apart - that is how they get their paycheck and power.
The next influx of UC students may be asked to state their sexual orientation.

In January, the Academic Senate recommended that upon accepting admission offers from a University of California school students should have the option of identifying themselves as lesbian, gay, bi-sexual or transgender.

The UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools had mixed reactions but agreed that the question would allow them to collect important statistical information. They recommended putting the question on the SIR forms instead of college applications to protect students’ privacy.
Leave them kids along.

California might just help us all by showing where it all leads to ... if we don't stand up to it.

Good news ... more and more people are standing up to it - especially the young.

This sectarian cancer must be opposed. It must be pointed out for what it is.

This is no less distasteful than someone who would base their support for a political candidate founded primarily on their self-proclaimed race.

In a fair and just society - one would not stand for a person of stature being so bigoted as to support someone based primarily on skin color; would you?

If you allow sectarianism grab hold without protest - it grows and becomes normal. Normal like this.

There is nothing wrong with being a strong supporter of President Obama. If you base that support around his self-identified race .... well ... then you have a problem.

That my friends, is an appeal to the most base and destructive brand of sectarianism - racism.

Shame on Chicago; and shame on us for letting this grow in broad daylight - but in a way that is good. As it is out in the light ... it is easier to destroy.

Good luck defending any of the above racialist actions ... you can't with a good conscience, can you? Of course not ... that is why it is so bad it is good.

No comments: