Pat Buchanan: The Donald & The La Raza Judge

[DiogenesLamp]

Solely serving Hispanic programs

Critics also argue that NCLR’s programs only serve Hispanics. This is simply not true. NCLR and its programs are covered by civil rights laws administered by independent agencies at the federal, state, and local level. We helped enact some of these laws, and we take them very seriously.

For example, in 2006, as part of NCLR’s homeownership program, NCLR Affiliates served about 29,000 clients. Almost 20% were White and approximately 12% were Black.

20% eh?   


How does that number jive with their percentage of the population as a whole?

Whites (including Hispanics who identified as White) constitute the majority, with a total of about 246,660,710, or 77.35% of the population as of 2014. Non-Hispanic Whites totaled about 197,870,516, or 62.06% of the U.S. population.

Now isn't that odd?   20% of their support went to a group that makes up 74% or 62% of a population.   Their support for Blacks (12%) is approximately correct,   so i'll give them that one.    It's probably on target because there is no way that a Judge would overlook a heavy discrimination against blacks,  and they know it. 



So what ethnic group made up the other 68% of their support?   


If I were a civil rights organization such as the ACLU,  I believe I would have a pretty good claim for discrimination here.   People have lost their businesses for a whole lot better numbers than those.   


I suppose I should have realized that as Lawyers,   they knew better than to freeze out any group.  I should not be surprised to discover that many of them are very acquainted with federal discrimination laws,   and realized they absolutely had to demonstrate that they had some non-hispanic clients. 

The program targets low-income neighborhoods that contain large Hispanic populations, where NCLR Affiliates are often among the few institutions to offer their services in both English and Spanish. For these reasons, and due to the demographics of the neighborhoods served and the type of services offered, NCLR Affiliates tend to attract a Hispanic clientele, although not exclusively.

That is precisely what I would say too if 68% of the people I helped were of a specific ethnicity.   

"No your Honor,  we don't discriminate.   It just so happens that our services are confined to a specific geographic area that has a mostly Hispanic population.   If whites, blacks and Asians move in there,  why we would be *GLAD*  to help them. "   


Funny thing is,   that argument failed in several discrimination lawsuits that I have heard of over the years,   but we all know how this Liberal Lawyer/ Liberal Judge crap works.   

We note that throughout NCLR’s history, its staff have been represented by Americans from a wide spectrum of racial and ethnic groups—White, Black, Asian, Native American, Hispanic, and so on. We note further that NCLR’s bylaws, personnel policies, and institutional values contain explicit prohibitions against discrimination.

http://www.nclr.org/about-us/who-we-are/

Just as the law would require.   Again,  they're all lawyers,  so they are not stupid,   and they know what they absolutely must do,  and what they can get away with. 


But this sophistry does not make it "non discrimination."   It just means they've figured out a way to work around the legal system. 

[Idaho_Cowboy]

20% eh?   


How does that number jive with their percentage of the population as a whole?


Now isn't that odd?   20% of their support went to a group that makes up 74% or 62% of a population.   Their support for Blacks (12%) is approximately correct,   so i'll give them that one.    It's probably on target because there is no way that a Judge would overlook a heavy discrimination against blacks,  and they know it. 



So what ethnic group made up the other 68% of their support?   


If I were a civil rights organization such as the ACLU,  I believe I would have a pretty good claim for discrimination here.   People have lost their businesses for a whole lot better numbers than those.   


I suppose I should have realized that as Lawyers,   they knew better than to freeze out any group.  I should not be surprised to discover that many of them are very acquainted with federal discrimination laws,   and realized they absolutely had to demonstrate that they had some non-hispanic clients. 








That is precisely what I would say too if 68% of the people I helped were of a specific ethnicity.   

"No your Honor,  we don't discriminate.   It just so happens that our services are confined to a specific geographic area that has a mostly Hispanic population.   If whites, blacks and Asians move in there,  why we would be *GLAD*  to help them. "   


Funny thing is,   that argument failed in several discrimination lawsuits that I have heard of over the years,   but we all know how this Liberal Lawyer/ Liberal Judge crap works.   









Just as the law would require.   Again,  they're all lawyers,  so they are not stupid,   and they know what they absolutely must do,  and what they can get away with. 


But this sophistry does not make it "non discrimination."   It just means they've figured out a way to work around the legal system.

Wait just a cotton picking minute. In what wide and wacky world can we sue an organization based on the percentages of the race of its members?
By your reasoning the NBA is racist too, as is the NHL. As we always suspected the real racist are Nascar. Have you looked at the percentage of Asian driver's in Nascar?

[DiogenesLamp]

Wait just a cotton picking minute. In what wide and wacky world can we sue an organization based on the percentages of the race of its members?

The quote to which I responded was this one:   

For example, in 2006, as part of NCLR’s homeownership program, NCLR Affiliates served about 29,000 clients. Almost 20% were White and approximately 12% were Black.

Perhaps we need clarification here,   but I do not regard the word "client"   to mean the same thing as the word "member".   

I would think that this group helps people who do not necessarily have to join their organization to receive such help.    Since the "La Raza Lawyers association" would presumably be made up of "Lawyers",   I would find it odd indeed that 29,000 Lawyers would need financial assistance.


Of course if Obama's economy continues,   that may very well become the case.

By your reasoning the NBA is racist too, as is the NHL. As we always suspected the real racist are Nascar. Have you looked at the percentage of Asian driver's in Nascar?

And this is where your mistake should be admitted.   No,  it isn't *MY*  reasoning,   it is *your*  reasoning,  badly distorted by inattentiveness to detail,   and then wrongly attributed to me. 


"Clients"  are the people they help.   "Members"   are the people who make up the organization.   


Organizations can be racist solely on the basis of their membership if they deliberately exclude members of other races,   but that is obviously not the case here.  I'm pretty sure a person of any race can join the "La Raza Lawyers Association",   but they probably have to be a lawyer to get in.   

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Of all the "bait and switch"  sort of crap... Other people can play this stupid game too.   


http://www.bbb.org/dallas/business-reviews/trucking/aryan-transport-in-allen-tx-90411518


http://www.topseos.com/profile/aryan-business-solutions/


http://aryanimmigrationservices.com/


http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Aryan-Engineering.And.Manufacturing-Services-Inc.-408-980-9119


https://www.myqbd.com/index.php?/qatar-companies-profile-rev/5958/ARYAN_TRANSPORT_&_TRDG_CO_WLL


And no,   I didn't bother investigating each and every one to see if they were racist or not. 

Of course you did.  It's just that it presented more questions than answers to your ignorance.

http://www.topseos.com/profile/aryan-business-solutions/
business is located in Tamil Nadu, India and the directors name is Sridhar

http://aryanimmigrationservices.com/
is run by this guy...

Armin Aryan
B.B.A,
Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultant(RCIC),
Good standing member of Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council (ICCRC),
Commissioner for Oaths/Taking affidavits in the Province of Ontario ,
Commissioner for Oaths for Quebec and for outside of Quebec

http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Aryan-Engineering.And.Manufacturing-Services-Inc.-408-980-9119
Contact:    Mehdi Zaferani
Title:    President

https://www.myqbd.com/index.php?/qatar-companies-profile-rev/5958/ARYAN_TRANSPORT_&_TRDG_CO_WLL
The link itself shows its a Qatar company
Key Staff    :    Ezzat Ullah - Managing Director
Obaid Ullah - General Manager
Sayed Rehman - Manager

If you really were so dumb to make your argument without checking any of the websites...I suggest you do it next time.  I'm only going to waste so much time helping you figure stuff out.

Following *YOUR*  logic,   the mundane usage of the word "ARYAN"  proves that it cannot possibly have a RACIST context.   That's your argument in a nutshell. 

No. It. Doesn't.   It proves no such thing.   

You stumble into the truth and then deny it.  I have little hope for you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

"Aryan" (/ˈɛəriən, ˈɛərjən, ˈær-/)[1] is a term meaning "noble" which was used as a self-designation by Indo-Iranian people. The word was used by the Indic people of the Vedic period in India as an ethnic label for themselves, as well as to refer to the noble class and geographic location known as Āryāvarta where Indo-Aryan culture was based.[2][3] The closely related Iranian people also used the term as an ethnic label for themselves in the Avesta scriptures, and the word forms the etymological source of the country Iran.[4][5][6][7] It was believed in the 19th century that it was also a self-designation used by all Proto-Indo-Europeans, a theory that has now been abandoned.[8] Scholars point out that, even in ancient times, the idea of being an "Aryan" was religious, cultural and linguistic, not racial

[Right_in_Virginia]

[Idaho_Cowboy]

The quote to which I responded was this one:   


Perhaps we need clarification here,   but I do not regard the word "client"   to mean the same thing as the word "member".   

I would think that this group helps people who do not necessarily have to join their organization to receive such help.    Since the "La Raza Lawyers association" would presumably be made up of "Lawyers",   I would find it odd indeed that 29,000 Lawyers would need financial assistance.


Of course if Obama's economy continues,   that may very well become the case.




And this is where your mistake should be admitted.   No,  it isn't *MY*  reasoning,   it is *your*  reasoning,  badly distorted by inattentiveness to detail,   and then wrongly attributed to me. 


"Clients"  are the people they help.   "Members"   are the people who make up the organization.   


Organizations can be racist solely on the basis of their membership if they deliberately exclude members of other races,   but that is obviously not the case here.  I'm pretty sure a person of any race can join the "La Raza Lawyers Association",   but they probably have to be a lawyer to get in.

I stand corrected for using the wrong word in my post.

As I understood it you were attempting to use the statisics to prove they are racist.

Referring to the statistics you stated:

If I were a civil rights organization such as the ACLU,  I believe I would have a pretty good claim for discrimination here.   People have lost their businesses for a whole lot better numbers than those.    

Are you contending they are racist in regards to their clients and not memebers? Perhaps you can elaborate how the statics showed them to be open to claims of discrimination and possibly legal action.

[DiogenesLamp]

Of course you did.  It's just that it presented more questions than answers to your ignorance.

http://www.topseos.com/profile/aryan-business-solutions/
business is located in Tamil Nadu, India and the directors name is Sridhar

http://aryanimmigrationservices.com/
is run by this guy...

Armin Aryan
B.B.A,
Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultant(RCIC),
Good standing member of Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council (ICCRC),
Commissioner for Oaths/Taking affidavits in the Province of Ontario ,
Commissioner for Oaths for Quebec and for outside of Quebec

Hey!  You can use the internet!  Good for you.   Irrelevant to the point though.    The usage of the word "Aryan"   does not necessarily constitute racism.   That is amply demonstrated in my point.   


Now this might be a leap of understanding for you,   but the usage of the words "La Raza"   does not necessarily have to be racist either,   but that does not preclude it from being racist when it is used by a racist organization or in a racist context.   

If you really were so dumb to make your argument without checking any of the websites...

I had no need to find the particulars of what those businesses represented,   the point was made by the simple fact of their usage of a word that is often associated with racist organizations.   

I suggest you do it next time.  I'm only going to waste so much time helping you figure stuff out.

You aren't "helping"  anything,  you are deliberately muddying the waters by trying to argue that if some usages of the term are not racist,   then all usages of the term must not be racist either.   


I fear the point is simply over your head,   or you are being deliberately   obtuse  because you don't want to acknowledge the point.   


Non racist usage of a word does not preclude racist usage of a word. 

You stumble into the truth and then deny it.  I have little hope for you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

"Aryan" (/ˈɛəriən, ˈɛərjən, ˈær-/)[1] is a term meaning "noble" which was used as a self-designation by Indo-Iranian people. The word was used by the Indic people of the Vedic period in India as an ethnic label for themselves, as well as to refer to the noble class and geographic location known as Āryāvarta where Indo-Aryan culture was based.[2][3] The closely related Iranian people also used the term as an ethnic label for themselves in the Avesta scriptures, and the word forms the etymological source of the country Iran.[4][5][6][7] It was believed in the 19th century that it was also a self-designation used by all Proto-Indo-Europeans, a theory that has now been abandoned.[8] Scholars point out that, even in ancient times, the idea of being an "Aryan" was religious, cultural and linguistic, not racial

You are using a technique that is a common fallacy.   You state something which is true,   but which actually has no bearing on the point.   


Yes,  "Aryan"   has non racist usages,   and "La Raza"   apparently has non racist usages,   but this does not establish that *ALL*   usages are non racist.    You are putting forth a non sequitur   that does not establish the claim you are attempting to make.   


You "La Raza bowling"   etc does not prove the "council of La Raza"  is not a racist organization.   

[DiogenesLamp]

I stand corrected for using the wrong word in my post.

As I understood it you were attempting to use the statisics to prove they are racist.

Referring to the statistics you stated:
 

Are you contending they are racist in regards to their clients and not memebers? Perhaps you can elaborate how the statics showed them to be open to claims of discrimination and possibly legal action.

I thought I proved that clearly in the earlier post to which you responded.  At least it seemed quite clear to me.   


Whites make up either 62%-74% of the population,  depending on how you want to define it. 

12% of the people helped by the "La Raza Lawyers association"  were Black,   and this very closely corresponds to the percentage of the population that is black. 

20% of the people helped by the "la Raza lawyers association"  were White,   and this very greatly deviates from the percentage of the population they represent.   (62%-74%) 


68% of the people they have helped were Hispanic,  but they only constitute 17.4% of the population.   


If they were being strictly neutral regarding race,   17.4% of those people being helped would be Hispanic,   and 62-74% of them would be white. 


At least that is how the numbers have always come down from various courts regarding cases where white people have been accused of discrimination.   

In an effort to make the point clearer,   If the "La Raza Laywers association"   was "Anglo-Saxon Lawyers association",   they would be immediately accused of discrimination and sued because their clients do not correctly represent a corresponding cross section of the overall population.   


When white people have been sued,   the courts have generally applied a quota system relating to the percentages of the population that  are made up of the various groups.   


I remember one such instance years ago regarding a Lamp manufacture,  which I think was in Illinois.   (I believe I saw this case on 60 minutes years ago.)  His factory was in an area where it had a larger Hispanic population and had very few blacks,   but he was hauled into  court by the Federal government because he didn't have enough black people working for him.   

He claimed that he tried to hire blacks,   but there just wasn't very many of them in the surrounding area,   so he received very few black applications.   

He lost.   

[Mechanicos]

I thought I proved that clearly in the earlier post to which you responded.  At least it seemed quite clear to me.   


Whites make up either 62%-74% of the population,  depending on how you want to define it. 

12% of the people helped by the "La Raza Lawyers association"  were Black,   and this very closely corresponds to the percentage of the population that is black. 

20% of the people helped by the "la Raza lawyers association"  were White,   and this very greatly deviates from the percentage of the population they represent.   (62%-74%) 


68% of the people they have helped were Hispanic,  but they only constitute 17.4% of the population.   


If they were being strictly neutral regarding race,   17.4% of those people being helped would be Hispanic,   and 62-74% of them would be white. 


At least that is how the numbers have always come down from various courts regarding cases where white people have been accused of discrimination.   

In an effort to make the point clearer,   If the "La Raza Laywers association"   was "Anglo-Saxon Lawyers association",   they would be immediately accused of discrimination and sued because their clients do not correctly represent a corresponding cross section of the overall population.   


When white people have been sued,   the courts have generally applied a quota system relating to the percentages of the population that  are made up of the various groups.   


I remember one such instance years ago regarding a Lamp manufacture,  which I think was in Illinois.   (I believe I saw this case on 60 minutes years ago.)  His factory was in an area where it had a larger Hispanic population and had very few blacks,   but he was hauled into  court by the Federal government because he didn't have enough black people working for him.   

He claimed that he tried to hire blacks,   but there just wasn't very many of them in the surrounding area,   so he received very few black applications.   

He lost.

The term the courts use for that is Disparate impact and it has a ton of case law such as the red line rulings.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

I thought I proved that clearly in the earlier post to which you responded.  At least it seemed quite clear to me.   


Whites make up either 62%-74% of the population,  depending on how you want to define it. 

12% of the people helped by the "La Raza Lawyers association"  were Black,   and this very closely corresponds to the percentage of the population that is black. 

20% of the people helped by the "la Raza lawyers association"  were White,   and this very greatly deviates from the percentage of the population they represent.   (62%-74%) 


68% of the people they have helped were Hispanic,  but they only constitute 17.4% of the population.   


If they were being strictly neutral regarding race,   17.4% of those people being helped would be Hispanic,   and 62-74% of them would be white. 


At least that is how the numbers have always come down from various courts regarding cases where white people have been accused of discrimination.   

In an effort to make the point clearer,   If the "La Raza Laywers association"   was "Anglo-Saxon Lawyers association",   they would be immediately accused of discrimination and sued because their clients do not correctly represent a corresponding cross section of the overall population.   


When white people have been sued,   the courts have generally applied a quota system relating to the percentages of the population that  are made up of the various groups.   


I remember one such instance years ago regarding a Lamp manufacture,  which I think was in Illinois.   (I believe I saw this case on 60 minutes years ago.)  His factory was in an area where it had a larger Hispanic population and had very few blacks,   but he was hauled into  court by the Federal government because he didn't have enough black people working for him.   

He claimed that he tried to hire blacks,   but there just wasn't very many of them in the surrounding area,   so he received very few black applications.   

He lost.

So to balance the statiscs they need to starting turning away hispanics in favor of whites. Just to be fair, of course.
Why are you in favor of reverse affirmative action?

Have you examined any income/differences between hispanic and white lawyers? No idea what it would turn up, but certainly seems relevant to the claim.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I remember one such instance years ago regarding a Lamp manufacture,  which I think was in Illinois.   (I believe I saw this case on 60 minutes years ago.)  His factory was in an area where it had a larger Hispanic population and had very few blacks,   but he was hauled into  court by the Federal government because he didn't have enough black people working for him.   

He claimed that he tried to hire blacks,   but there just wasn't very many of them in the surrounding area,   so he received very few black applications.   

He lost.

I think I know the case to which you're referring, and though the lamp company lost at trial on both disparate treatment and disparate impact theories, it actually won both on appeal.  But it is important to note that a disparate impact case is not dependent on the employer's motive.  In other words, while a statistical imbalance can result in disparate impact liability (though that alone doesn't prove the case), it still doesn't prove an intent to discriminate.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Hey!  You can use the internet!  Good for you.   Irrelevant to the point though.    The usage of the word "Aryan"   does not necessarily constitute racism.   That is amply demonstrated in my point.

Now this might be a leap of understanding for you,   but the usage of the words "La Raza" does not necessarily have to be racist either,

That has been my point.  It took a long time for you to get there, but now when Mechanicos starts up with his "La Raza" = KKK crap I can quote you "the usage of the words "La Raza" does not necessarily have to be racist ."  The rest of your reply, while useless in content, is still illustrative of the depths some people will go to pretend their argument hasn't turned around 180 degrees.  Thank you for playing...you have been spectacular.  

You "La Raza bowling"   etc does not prove the "council of La Raza"  is not a racist organization.   

I have not been arguing that the "council of La Raza" is not a racist organization, strawman.  I have been arguing that the Judge  Curiel does not belong to a racist organization.  "La Raza Lawyers of San Diego" is not a racist organization.

[DiogenesLamp]

So to balance the statiscs they need to starting turning away hispanics in favor of whites. Just to be fair, of course.

That is what the courts keep telling us when the shoe is on an Anglo foot.    Why would it be different when the shoe is on a Chicano foot?   

Isn't equality about treating everyone the same?   

Why are you in favor of reverse affirmative action?

I'm not in favor of reverse affirmative action,  nor am I in favor of affirmative action.   I am in favor of judging people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin,   but for some reason  much of the population doesn't see it that way,  and especially not the federal Judges.   


I also do not believe the government has any business interfering  if people want to discriminate.   I believe people have a right to discriminate if that is what they want to do,  and I think it ought to be up to the culture to punish them,   not the government.   

Have you examined any income/differences between hispanic and white lawyers? No idea what it would turn up, but certainly seems relevant to the claim.

I do not see how this is relevant.   A Primarily Hispanic organization  helps primarily Hispanic clients,  and I fully understand why they would want to do this.   


The problem is,  if it can be demonstrated that they are not applying the same standard to everyone,  (and I think this is amply demonstrated by their own numbers)   it is illegal,   or so we are told when Anglos do it.   

I also think it is telling that their support for black clients is exactly on the money with their demographic representation,   but the Hispanic/White ratio is totally backwards.   


It's as if they are completely aware they can get away with this discriminatory ratio against whites,   but they know fully well they could not get away with it against blacks.   


But It could just be my cynicism. 

 

[DiogenesLamp]

I think I know the case to which you're referring, and though the lamp company lost at trial on both disparate treatment and disparate impact theories, it actually won both on appeal.  But it is important to note that a disparate impact case is not dependent on the employer's motive.  In other words, while a statistical imbalance can result in disparate impact liability (though that alone doesn't prove the case), it still doesn't prove an intent to discriminate.

For small disparities that seems reasonable,   but for extremely large disparities?  The wave function approaches collapse.  :) 


If the shoe were on the other foot,  most people would not hesitate to assert racism in the disparate impact of that organization's doings. 

[DiogenesLamp]

That has been my point.  It took a long time for you to get there, but now when Mechanicos starts up with his "La Raza" = KKK crap I can quote you "the usage of the words "La Raza" does not necessarily have to be racist ." 

And the corollary is that non-racist usage of the term does not indemnify it against being used as a racist term.   In other words,  you haven't disproven the salient point.   

That "The RACE"  used by the "La Raza Lawyers association"   isn't intended to refer to them being Pro-Hispanic race.   

The rest of your reply, while useless in content, is still illustrative of the depths some people will go to pretend their argument hasn't turned around 180 degrees.  Thank you for playing...you have been spectacular.  

Uh,  the point remains that "La Raza Lawyers association",  and their kissing cousin the  "Council of La Raza",  in context,  appear to be racist organizations.     You can claim you won,  but that annoying whiff of bias is still lying there on the debate table.   


Your arguments have been " full of sound and fury signifying nothing."   

I have not been arguing that the "council of La Raza" is not a racist organization, strawman.  I have been arguing that the Judge  Curiel does not belong to a racist organization.  "La Raza Lawyers of San Diego" is not a racist organization.

And what have you said to demonstrate that it is not?   Talk about bowling leagues in Mexico?  What does that have to do with it?   

Again,  a common tactic of diversion is to say things which are true,   but which really have nothing at all to do with the point in contention.   


If I understand you correctly,  your argument reduces to this:   

"Because non-explicitly racist organizations use the words "La Raza",   the "La Raza Lawyers association"  is therefore non- racist. "


Non sequitur.   If you said anything to demonstrate that the "La Raza Lawyers association"  is non-racist,   I must have missed it.


 The "Disparate Impact"  evidence which past courts have been so fond of when such methodology is  applied to Anglos,   indicates that they are.   

[Formerly Once-Ler]

If you said anything to demonstrate that the "La Raza Lawyers association"  is non-racist,   I must have missed it.

You want me to prove a negative now?  I'm happy with my argument.  You can have the last word.

[txradioguy]

Well...Donald is simply finding out now what happens when you step off the Democratic plantation.

[DiogenesLamp]

You want me to prove a negative now?  I'm happy with my argument.  You can have the last word.

You were trying to prove a negative from the beginning.   I apparently just made this clearer to you.