Linda Chavez, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity and honorary co-chair of the new Colorado Civil Rights Initiative, explains to Arizona readers why she abandoned her earlier support for affirmative action.
When I entered the University of Colorado as a freshman in the fall of 1965, there were few black or Hispanic students enrolled. During my five years as an undergraduate and graduate student at CU, first at the Denver campus and then in Boulder, I encountered only one other Hispanic in any of my classes and perhaps one or two blacks.
That didn’t seem right to me. So I joined with a group of other students to persuade the university to aggressively recruit more minority students and set up tutoring programs and summer sessions of remedial courses to assist those who lacked the skills to compete effectively.
The Educational Opportunity Program started out with great promise. It was exactly what was intended by affirmative action: to cast a wider net and provide the skills necessary to compete on an equal footing.
But it soon transmogrified into a program that lowered standards and radicalized students in the process.
The university not only admitted students whose academic preparation made it nearly impossible for them to succeed, but it also permitted many to remain in school despite failing grades.
Worse, the program’s organizers encouraged students to take largely segregated ethnic studies courses whose primary purpose was to forge ethnic solidarity and reinforce students’ feelings that they were victims of a racist society bent on their destruction.
By the time I left Boulder in 1970, I had become a critic of affirmative action, and my later experiences as an instructor in the affirmative action program at UCLA made me a downright opponent of such programs.
Unfortunately, Ms. Chavez has sharply criticized those who question the need for and wisdom of large-scale immigration from Latin America. In California, the continuing influx of Latino students who perform poorly academically will guarantee the eventual overthrow of Proposition 209, as President Dynes of the UC System has predicted. The Democratic party, led by the Latino Caucus and far-left wing has effectively neutralized Prop. 209 anyway, forcing the Univ. of California to use racial/gender preferences in admissions under the guise of “comprehensive review” and to exploit faculty hiring programs that bypass open search procedures.
One of the odder themes to emerge from the Duke rape hoax was the assertion that black studies departments at universities have become dumping grounds for black athletes, with incredibly soft course offerings designed primarily to keep poorly qualified athletes in school.
Of course, the faculty of the black studies department at Duke didn’t exactly appear to be people of high academic credentials either. They seem to have been chosen primarily for their willingness to strike radical poses.
Another amusing revelation of the Duke hoax: the black, women’s and queer studies departments have trouble attracting students. Apparently few students want to major in a curriculum that offers little if any hope of employment. The hoax was a recruiting and funding drive for these departments. We learned, I think, that the recurrent crises of “racism, sexism and homophobia” on campuses are usually incited by the faculty of black, women’s and queer studies departments as a vehicle for acquiring funding and students.
It is easier to become an Uncle Tom or Aunt Thomasina – Traitor to the Black Afrikan Race like Wardell Connerly or Condileeza Rice & receive Prestige & $ from the Oppressor –
than to fight for Colonial Liberation & suffer poverty or death & repression
$ for college forces students to opt for professions that do not challenge the Opressor
Yep. Freeman is definitely John Candy in Volunteers.
Revisionist writes:
>>>”Unfortunately, Ms. Chavez has sharply criticized those who question the need for and wisdom of large-scale immigration from Latin America.”
Don’t tell me you’re SHOCKED by this criticism? Surely, we’re discussing the SAME Linda Chavez….
>>>”When Bush set up his first Cabinet in 2001, conservative commentator Linda Chavez also stepped aside as the nominee for labor secretary after it was disclosed that she had given money and shelter to an illegal immigrant who once did chores around her house.”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-12-10-kerik-out_x.htm
I’m not sure exactly what your point is on this one, Cobra. The Chavez scandal was the tiniest of all tiny scandals in the history of scandalhood.
Exactly how does this disqualify her? I gather you dislike her and that you are searching for any reason to buttress that dislike. But, there’s nothing there.
In fact, as I recall from this teeny tiny scandal, Ms. Chavez was performing an act of charity. Most of us aren’t looking for an entirely hypocrisy free life, Cobra. We do what is called for by the circumstances of our lives. And, as I recall, this posting is about her views on AA, not on immigration. Is this more of the “race traitor” fuming?
I’ve read that Linda Chavez is a director of a janitorial services company which is suspected of employing illegals. This may color her views of the “need” for illegal immigrant labor.
I’ve read that Linda Chavez is a director of a janitorial services company which is suspected of employing illegals.
Perhaps you should read a bit more. Start with this item on VDARE, a site never accused of softness on illegal immigration, which discusses ABM industries, the national janitorial services with which Ms. Chavez has been associated.
One can support immigration, as Ms. Chavez in fact does, without supporting illegal immigration, which I assume she does not.
Cobra, the two parts of your comment just don’t go together the way you seem to think they do. Chavez criticizes those who “question” the need for immigration. She is not against it. (in fact, no one is.)
That she was kind enough to offer housing to an alien proves what exactly? It proves, to my mind, that she may not have been fit to be labor secretary, but nothing more.
John writes:
>>>”One can support immigration, as Ms. Chavez in fact does, without supporting illegal immigration, which I assume she does not.”
…and you base that assumption on what? Certainly not through the personal example she set, right?
–Cobra
Again, Cobra, the statement you are quoting does not seem to support what you think it supports. Chavez helped an illegal immigrant become a legal citizen. She gave shelter to a woman in need. Why in the world would anyone prefer that she did something else.
From Wiki:
“In 2001, President George W. Bush nominated her for Secretary of Labor, but the nomination was withdrawn after it was revealed that she had allegedly given money to an illegal immigrant who lived in her home. Chavez contended that she had not actually employed the woman, but had merely provided her with emergency assistance. The woman Chavez allegedly employed (who is now a legal citizen of the United States) also insists she was not an employee of Chavez, and credits Chavez with helping her at a time when she needed it most. A subsequent investigation of the matter by the FBI found Chavez was not guilty of any wrongdoing.”
Revisionist,
It is not surprising that here in California , the UC system, the private universities and their political allies in the media, legislature, the church are using the massive increase in the Hispanic population in California due to illegal immigration as a hammer to increase the number of Hispanics in the universities at all costs. Proxies for race such as ” life experiences “, “going to an urban school”, “the first in the family to go college ” are all going to be used to bootstrap this mad attempt to increase the number of Latinos and blacks in the universities. BAMN ( By An y Means Necessary ) is the correct phrase to describe this madness. Pirvate schools like USC, Stanford, the Claremont Colleges are in the forefront of this deranged activity.
From Linda Chavez HERSELF:
>>>”I don’t remember precisely when Marta Mercado moved into my home or how long she lived there a decade ago. She is one of dozens of people in need I have helped over the years, just as I was helped by family and friends during times of crisis in my childhood. Some of those I’ve aided stood with me on Tuesday when I asked that my nomination be withdrawn.
I don’t recall how much money I gave Marta during the time she lived with me, though I do remember giving her money in several hundred-dollar increments to spend or send home to her daughters in Guatemala.
I also remember her being helpful around the house, picking up after my teen-age sons with whom she shared the lower level of my home.”
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/chavez011501.asp
Come on, Dom. You’re a smart guy. You write great posts on this blog. Call a spade a spade here, ok? Chavez, for all intents and purposes, had a live-in, illegal alien maid off the books and got caught.
She’s not the first person to do this, and certainly won’t be the last. The irony, is that Chavez works incessantly to destroy Affirmative Action–something that will put millions of people like Marta Mercado at a further disadvantage in an already racist and sexist society.
Now, just like Ward Connerly, Linda Chavez is a minority who knows exactly who’s buttering her bread…
>>>”Leading conservative groups give money to (Chavez’s group Center For Equal Opportunity) CEO through its parent organization, Equal Opportunity Foundation (EOF). Manhattan Institute senior fellow Thernstrom, who has been among the most outspoken critics of affirmative action and the feminist movement, sits on EOF’s board, according to historian Lee Cokorinos’ The Assault on Diversity. She is the vice chair of UCCR and a member of the Massachusetts Board of Education.
Thernstrom and UCCR Chair Reynolds joined Connerly and Chavez in developing the Citizens’ Initiative on Race and Ethnicity—a platform for opponents to former President Clinton’s Initiative on Race. Reynolds also worked directly for CEO as a legal analyst prior to becoming president of the Center for Black Leadership, a conservative think-tank.
The Lambe Foundation, with libertarian Charles G. Koch on the board, also has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to CEO. Funding for the Lambe Foundation comes from Koch Industries, the nation’s largest privately held energy company with more than $25 billion in annual sales.
Koch’s brother David funded publication of Affirmative Action Fraud—a book Cokorinos describes as one of the most cutting diatribes against affirmative action in history. The Koch brothers have a combined fortune of more than $3 billion.”
http://www.diversityinc.com/public/712.cfm
Follow the money, Dom. Hamstringing minorities is big business in America.
–Cobra
Well, I’m just lost here. Your quote from Chavez reveals a very kind, big-hearted woman. She did everything right, as far as I can tell.
And again, if the second quote shows that she “hamstrings” minorities, then what do you make of the first quote? And why do you keep telling JR that Chavez secretly supports illegal immigration?
Oh well. I don’t want to highjack the comments here. Let’s agree to disagree.
“Chavez, for all intents and purposes, had a live-in, illegal alien maid off the books and got caught.”
You are characterizing what she said that way because you dislike Chavez. If I found myself in the position of having to live in someone else’s house and accept her charity, you’d better believe I’d be picking up clutter and whatever else I could do to express my gratitude. You wanted the woman to sulk in a corner?
Dom writes:
>>>”Well, I’m just lost here. Your quote from Chavez reveals a very kind, big-hearted woman. She did everything right, as far as I can tell.”
Do you believe the harboring and hiring of illegal immigrants is “doing everything right?”
You do realize that harboring and hiring illegal immigrants is…well..AGAINST THE LAW?
Laura writes:
>>>”If I found myself in the position of having to live in someone else’s house and accept her charity, you’d better believe I’d be picking up clutter and whatever else I could do to express my gratitude. You wanted the woman to sulk in a corner?”
You see, now you’re putting the onus on Marta Mercado. I’d rather keep it on Linda Chavez, who’s using pro white think-tank money to gaffle minority women just like Mercado.
It’s the height of hypocrisy, IMHO. A woman like Chavez, with an anti-minority/anti-women agenda having absolutely no qualms with harboring an illegal alien to scrub her floors and wash her dirty laundry on a discount.
I’d call it an abomination.
Does Tom Tancredo know about this website, people?
–Cobra
Chavez does not have an “anti-minority/anti-women agenda.” She believes in self-relianace and personal responsibility and she believes that these values produce the best results for minorities and women.
In fact, if the real test is results, Cobra, I believe that you are anti-minority and anti-black. The values you espouse, which are welfare entitlement, self-pity, blaming others and excusing criminal behavior, produce terrible results for minorities and blacks. In fact, these values land half of black men in prison, and result in a 70% illegitimacy rate for black children. In the same way, racial and sexual quotas ultimately hurt minorities and women by encouraging dependency and a sense of false entitlement.
It’s the results that count. Chavez’s values produce better results for minorities and women.
“You see, now you’re putting the onus on Marta Mercado.”
Hell, yes, I’ll put onus on her. That raises her to the status of a human being, as opposed to a cardboard cutout for Linda Chavez to practice altruism on.
Stephen writes:
>>>”She believes in self-relianace and personal responsibility and she believes that these values produce the best results for minorities and women.”
Well, apparently she believes in “relying” on illegal aliens to do her personal domestic “responsibilities.”
Don’t sit there and try to sugar coat this. She paid Marta Mercado OFF THE BOOKS.
>>>”Hell, yes, I’ll put onus on her. That raises her to the status of a human being, as opposed to a cardboard cutout for Linda Chavez to practice altruism on.”
You call it “altruism?”
Well, I guess then EVERYBODY who hires illegal aliens must be doing it out of some sense of good will, right?
Now, getting political for a second…I agree with you that Marta Mercado is indeed a human being. If she was granted the same AMNESTY that is granted to Cubans who wash up on our shores, she probably would not have required “charity”, much less Linda Chavez’.
Whether I personally support amnesty or not is not germain to this thread, but I sincerely doubt Linda Chavez has room for 12 Million illegal alien maids.
–Cobra
Cobra.
Please.
You really think Marta Mercados should have lounged around Linda Chavez’s house, accepting her charity and not lifting a finger to help with the housework?
For pete’s sake! What a worthless, trifling wretch she would have been if she’d done that.
Also: You think every immigrant to this country is fleeing Cuba?
Laura,
You said before that I “characterized” what Chavez said because I dislike her. You’re partially right…I’m NOT a big fan of Linda Chavez.
But you’re ALSO characterizing her actions, except in a POSITIVE light. “Charity” is giving without expecting or accepting ANYTHING in return. Obviously, that wasn’t the dynamic at work in the Chavez household.
Was Marta Mercado the most “TRAINED” AND “QUALIFIED” live-in maid available to Linda Chavez? I would wager not. Chavez didn’t use merit to hire the best person for the job. She went the illegal alien route, which just so happened to save her from paying the going salary rate of LEGAL live-in maid services, and probably taxation.
And now, Linda Chavez has joined the pitchfork-carrying anti-minority-progress mob. Not surprising in the least.
–Cobra
“Chavez didn’t use merit to hire the best person for the job.”
That’s because she wasn’t HIRING a MAID, Cobra, she was HELPING a PERSON.
Dang, never mind.