Anti-Terror Vote > Hispanic Vote?

Several sources report today, that the DSCC has an ad on their website that portrays Hispanics as terrorists.  Apparently, the DSCC has already pulled the ad from their website.  The Washington Post sums it up best:

Houston City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado, a Democrat, sent a letter to DSCC Chairman Sen. Charles Schumer of New York asking that the ad be pulled. She said it could alienate Latino voters.

“To liken Latino immigrants to bazooka-toting terrorists not only undermines the positive relationship our party has with this community, but also lowers us to a despicable level as breeders of unfounded fear and hatred,” Alvarado wrote.

The ad opens with the words “Security Under Bush and GOP?” It features scenes of a masked man with a bazooka, scenes from terrorist attacks and police inspecting a subway train. It also shows Osama bin Laden, Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a docked ship as it claims “4 times as many terrorist attacks in 2005.”

Then comes footage of a person climbing over a corrugated metal border fence and another preparing to climb it as the words “millions more illegal immigrants” form on-screen. In the following scene, viewers see the words “North Korea has quadrupled its nuclear arsenal” with footage of a tank and North Korea President Kim Jong Il.

The ad ends with the words, “Feel safer? Vote for change.”

“Equating these undocumented migrants to the very real threats of terrorism is inexcusable and only serves to fan the flames of anti-immigrant sentiment in our country,” Celis said in the statement.

Here’s a link to the entire story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/15/AR2006081500981.html 

9 comments

  1. SpaceyG says:

    Peach Slap the total crap outta the DSCC for that one. And speaking of shaking in our shoes over media-induced hysteria, has there been any discussion on here about Ahmadinejad on 60 Minutes? If that’s the face of terror these days, the White House is going to have to work a little harder in the propaganda fields.

  2. The ‘hispanic outrage’ vs. the dems sounds like another republican talking point to me . . . . . I guess we will see is november which party will be the real recipient of some ‘hispanic outrage’.

  3. pulease says:

    Demonbeck, I think that if you look at Mitt Romney, George Allen, Rush Limbaugh, Lynn Westmoreland, Trent Lott (shall I go on) and company, you will be the recipient of enough Freudian evidence to the real racism in American Politics.

    Recent history (last 50 years or so) has provided plenty of empirical data showing the true colors of right-wing conservatives (which last time I checked vote along party lines no matter WHO the candidate is). Wallace’s stand, Philadelphia, MS, Reagan’s speech in Philadelphia, MS, Reagan’s support of tax-exempt status for Bob Jones University, Strom Thurmond’s clearly hypocritical support of racist policies, all the way up through and including the Republican Congressional Delegation’s support of not extending the Civil Rights Voting Act during the last session.

    Not to mention the votes against the Children’s Safety Act of 2005 by Kingston, Gingrey, Price, Linder et .al. due to the ammendment offering passage of legislation recognizing hate crimes at the federal level.

    As I get off on another rant, I find it interesting that these are the same people who vehemently support the death penalty as a deterrent (proven not to work), but will cease support of a bill designed (and co-sponsored by Tom Price) to protect children from sexual predators, because of an ammendment that makes hate crimes recognized at the federal level, which is designed to be a deterrent…that might be in and of itself either the greatest example of IRONY or the best example of HYPOCRISY. I can’t decide….

    Perhaps republicans are victims of fate….it can’t be their fault that the stand that they take across the board on just about every issue can be directly or indirectly tied to a racist undercurrent…we should give them a break and overlook that fact come November…

  4. Demonbeck says:

    Pulease,

    I’m sorry, I’m a little dizzy from all that spinning. I think you may have forgotten to demagogue a few issues.

    Oh and Robert Byrd says hello.

    So do the ghosts of the Dixiecrats.

    As for your belief that the recent votes against the Voting Rights Act being racist. Clearly, you are looking for something that just isn’t there. The votes cast against that Act were based upon the belief that the states (including Georgia) who are forced to gain approval from the DoJ for any redistricting proposals are unfairly discriminated against because they are held to a different standard than the rest of the nation. Certainly, you, an advocate against discrimination, can see that this bill does just that to these states. In the past 20+ years, even you would have to agree that these states have shown no more proclivity than any other state in the nation towards establishing laws that are racist in nature. In fact, one could even argue that because of the constant changes being made because of DoJ rejections have caused more voter disenfranchisement than they have averted. Hell, even Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney doesn’t even know where her district ends and begins.

    Why is discrimination against one minority group any different than discrimination against another? At least the stance taken by the small minority of Republican Congressmen (192 Republican Congressman and 100% of Republican Senators voted for the VRA) isn’t contradictory.

  5. RealConservative says:

    Pulease, let me check..I think….everything?….yes?…no?….oh, ok, yes….yep — every single thing you said was wrong. Ouch.

  6. pulease says:

    Demonbeck,

    Thanks for the lesson on the VRA. I am familiar with it and as Ihave said here and on other boards Georgia clearly has a record in just the last several years that proves that the DoJ should be involved in our law making with regard to elections laws.

    Can you say VoterID. How many courts have to rule the conservative versions of the rule un-constitutional, before you realize that the racism is still alive and well in politics in Georgia.

    I love watching the trump cards that you and “RealConservative” use as part of all discussions that offer a differing point of view. FIrst, your use of Cynthia McKinney is a joke…even the constituents of the 4th distrcit have clearly indicated that she doesn’t speak for them. As a progressive she doesn’t speak for me either, so enough with the attempts to divert the thread with your “Cynthia McKinney” palaver.

    As you point out, the law does discriminate against states that historically have created, enforced and judged legislation that was discriminatory. I suppose then that using this logic, you are against the death penalty? Because if you think that its possible for STATES to reform, then surely a murderer, rapist, child sexual predator can reform. Selectively pulling the discrimination card is an anthem of republican and conservative politics…Georgia as most of the other states, have a long history of discrimination in practice and should be held accountable for it.

    RealConservative….if you assume that anything I said was objective, then you are wrong…much of it as Demonbeck pointed out is spin…with one exception…all of those republicans voted against protecting children’s safety…there is NOTHING inaccurate about that point.

    I’m sure that when it comes time to vote, that you, likely being a good party line voter, will not hold them responsible for that vote…and I’m sure you can come up with some justification of some philisophical point that trumps doing the right thing to protect kids….well…maybe not YOU…but surely these representatives of YOURS can.

  7. Demonbeck says:

    Pulease,

    The issue on the VRA is that the federal government should review EVERY state’s redistricting plans or none at all.

    “I suppose then that using this logic, you are against the death penalty? Because if you think that its possible for STATES to reform, then surely a murderer, rapist, child sexual predator can reform. ”

    No, electorates changes for a variety of reasons. I would certainly never support killing someone over an uneducated vote. I do, however, support the death penalty wholeheartedly and wish it would be used more often as a deterrent to other malicious crimes. It is your party that supports the killing of the innocent, not mine.

    “Selectively pulling the discrimination card is an anthem of republican and conservative politics…”

    Cynthia McKinney says hello…as do a litany of elected Democrats across the nation.

  8. Mad Dog says:

    As a Damned Yankee, someone from the North who came to visit and stayed, racism is very alive and well in Georgia.

    The question is, to give credit where I don’t want to give credit, does racism in the South bleed over into certain governmental activities in such a way as to warrant federal oversight and intervention?

    Demonbeck’s point. He didn’t state it that way and might have wondered off the plantation in his 8-21 post. But, I think that is what he’s really saying.

    It’s a valid point.

    I don’t have the answer. I have worked FOR racists who would NOT advertise employment oppurtunities. Verbally, they ranted about all kinds of crap that didn’t matter, but was the topic of trash talk radio. One of my past employers, one of the worst, had government contracts that required drug testing of employees, etc.

    I said drug testing. I could have said drug screening. The only drug testing was for quality. There was no drug screening etc.

    I did take the cowards way out. I performed my contract and left. I took proof with me and turned that proof over. Nothing changed.

    Even that does not mean that the STATE has institutionalized bias against non-white races. Seeing a hand full of bigots, or a street full of bigots, does not prove the State acts to suppress individuals or groups for ethnic or racial or religious or gender reasons.

    However, given the depth of hatred expressed by some, I’d suggest the south continue to be monitored for acts of racial bias in legislation, regulations, or commerce until there is no one living that remembers Jim Crow.

Comments are closed.