“Sometimes, it’s my appearance and background — light skin, middle class, poor Spanish, etc. — that cause fellow Latinos to view me with suspicion or even hostility. More often, it’s the things I write. The Latino left attacked me when, during the immigration debate, I came out in favor of workplace raids, sped-up deportations and more resources for the Border Patrol. They were no more pleased when, on other fronts, I opposed bilingual education, racial preferences and Latino boycotts.

Curiously, they think I’m wrong even when they agree with me. Case in point: Recently, I went on CNN’s “Newsroom” and criticized Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Liberal bloggers applauded — then turned around and attacked me for also defending, at one point, conservative Latinos Alberto Gonzales and Miguel Estrada.”

Well duh Ruben! You are going to get called out by your those in your ethnic group when you come out in favor of more workplace raids, sped up deportations, etc., especially in light of US citizen Latinos being detained mistakenly by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

I sometimes think that Navarrette hits the nail on the head, and other times, he misses it. But a writer can be applauded or praised when some agree with him or criticized when others don’t. I and others don’t necessarily have to agree with Ruben Navarrette all the time. Yet in this piece, he frames things in a black and white or shall I say brown and white way of absolutes, as an “you are either against me or with me and when you don’t agree with me, I must not be brown enough” way.

What makes Navarrette’s piece all the more interesting to me is that he made his big literary debut with a book titled, A Darker Shade of Crimson: Odyssey of a Harvard Chicano, marketing himself with his heritage in the title. Navarrette is sought out by major media outlets precisely because he is brown and can articulate himself on Latino affairs, so he should not be surprised when his words don’t go over well with the Chicanostocracy that the reactions turn into an indictment on his Chicano-ness.

Finally, I don’t think that we achieve anything by calling Navarrette names. It becomes rather childish, and there are better ways to articulate disagreements. I will admit that if he were named Reuben Smith, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion, and it is likely that he wouldn’t even be given a platform to commentate on Latino affairs. But the criticism and continued parading of Ruben Navarrette does point to the lack of Latino voices in the traditional media.

I think that Senator Salazar brings a mixed bag to the table, but he has practiced environmental law before and has a lifetime rating of 81% from the League of Conservation voters. As this DailyKos article points out, his environmental record is not as good as Rep. Raul Grijalva, the other Latino who was being considered. Some think that taking Salazar out of the Senate would be a good move since the Governor of Colorado is a Dem and could appoint a more progressive candidate. However, if you are more conservative in your views, what do you think about Senator Salazar? Does he seem like someone who will do a good job? Also worth noting, Senator Salazar did run Colorado’s Natural Resources Department from 1990 to 1994.

I appreciated John Edwards for speaking out on behalf of the poorest Americans. He also is a big believer in the notion that everyone can obtain a college education, which is actually a concept that Harry Truman first brought to the national agenda with the Presidential Commission on Higher Education in 1947. Over 60 years later in America, and we are still falling short of enrolling our citizens in postsecondary institutions and assisting them with the support needed to graduate and complete degree programs that allow them to earn a decent living. As I have discussed before, Latinos are terribly under-represented in American colleges and universities.

John Edwards is still involved in the College for Everyone Program, which is a scholarship program that he and his wife Elizabeth started three years ago in North Carolina. As one of the only presidential candidates this season to really give higher education more thought than a few talking points, he used this opportunity today in stepping out on the national stage again to reach his former supporters via e-mail to donate to the College for Everyone effort.

John Edwards showed true leadership today in calling for the Democrats to come together to win back the White House by devoting their energy to campaigning against John McCain. There has been much speculation that should Obama win in November that he might consider John Edwards for Attorney General or some other cabinet level position. Wouldn’t that be a breath of fresh air, especially after having to endure Alberto Gonzales (aka Fredo)? I hope that he continues to be part of the discussion and policy making process because he has some great ideas for helping the most needy of Americans.

Photo Credit: AP

But I was particularly struck by this passage on p. 42:

“Not only are Latinos thriving in this country, but we’ve actually become avant-garde–we’re “where it’s at!” Everyone else wants to be like us. How else could salsa have become the new ketchup? Why else would folks in Kentucky celebrate Cinco de Mayo?

Not only is everyone eating our food, they’re learning our parents’ language, they’re listening to our music, they’re dancing our dances. Take a trip to Adams Morgan, a trendy Washington, D.C. neighborhood, and you can get ten-dollar salsa lessons from an excellent instructor–who happens to be Persian! The new salseros are people who don’t have so much as a Latin twig in their family trees.

Gone are the days when Hispanic actors like Ramon Estevez (now known as Martin Sheen) changed their names to fit into the American mainstream. Americans are eagerly watching and reading about famous Hispanics, whether it’s J-Lo in the NY Post’s Page Six, the accomplished A-Rod in the sports section, the powerful Carlos Gutierrez in the business section, or Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on page one.”

I don’t think that everyone wants to be like “us,” especially those of us who are incarcerated at higher rates than whites, experience dropping out of high school at alarming rates, and are tail spinning into foreclosure because we have been sold higher interest loans, specifically for “us.”

I become more discouraged by Ms. Sanchez’s insinuations that we are so hip because we have music and dances that the mainstream is finally taking note of. So what? All cultures have their own food, dances, and music. These cultural characteristics could easily not be in favor with whomever finds them fashionable tomorrow or next year. Eating our foods, dancing our dances, and listening to our music cannot be equated with “wanting to be like us” or living our struggles.

And then, this whole bit about “gone are the days when actors changed their names.” That may be the case on a certain level, but we still aren’t represented very well in Hollywood within the acting and film production ranks. And then there’s this ingrained notion among many in the entertainment elite that we Latinos must be downtrodden or live in barrios. We can’t possibly be portrayed in characters other than those showing us as exotic spitfires, cholos, or maids. Just read the referenced blog post by Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez, and you will sense the frustration that our creative community is feeling because our stories don’t quite fit into the “American mainstream” or the stereotype that studio executives think will sell for the masses.

And don’t get me started on J.Lo. This book was published in 2007. I don’t think that J.Lo has dominated tabloid news for the past couple of years.

Alberto Gonzales on the front page?! Yeah, he really made me proud last year. Accusations of perjury and being GWB’s lapdog endear former attorney general Alberto Gonzales to me and the rest of the American public. The Department of Justice has been left in shambles thanks to this guy.

So there you have it, the nearest book! I’ll be writing more about Los Republicanos in the future. I think that we all needed a break from presidential politics for a day or two.

This damning article in The Atlantic largely reveals the arrogance in the Clinton campaign and the problem with promoting a token Latina who can’t see the forest for the trees. Patti Solis Doyle, the woman who coined the term Hillaryland, was given the role of campaign manager largely because of her loyalty to Senator Clinton and not so much because of her skills. She isn’t a real strategist, that role was left for Mark Penn. Patti Solis Doyle would often say, “When I’m speaking, Hillary is speaking.” How arrogant and frightening!

Solis Doyle was also in charge of fundraising for Senator Clinton’s 2006 reelection bid. In the process, many high powered Clinton advisers were pushed out or fired, while she raked in the dough. Terry McAuliffe even lobbied privately with the Clintons to have Patti Solis Doyle removed two years ago, and current campaign manager Maggie Williams tried to oust Solis Doyle two years ago as well. The Atlantic states, “She [Solis Doyle] was infamous among her colleagues for referring to herself as “the queen bee” and for her habit of watching daytime soap operas in her office.” That’s a sure way to endear yourself to your staffers. I surely wouldn’t like it if any of my bosses referred to themselves as queen or king bees and watched trashy soaps on the job. Patti Solis Doyle could have justified watching C-SPAN or maybe even CNN, which has lately become more dramatic like the daily soaps, but telenovelas?!

Solis Doyle also displayed poor financial management skills with donor funds, as the Clinton campaign burned through more than $30 million for the senate reelection bid in 2006, even though Hillary didn’t face any serious opponents. To create an air of inevitability that Senator Clinton would be the Democratic party’s nominee for the presidency, Solis Doyle promoted the lie that $40-50 million would be left over after the ’06 election to dump into the presidential campaign kitty, when in reality about $10 million was left over.

So what does this mean, and where is the lesson for us? Well, the “world according to Patti Solis Doyle” demonstrates that we Latinos cannot get lazy on the job, especially when the stakes are high. This should go without saying, but we have to think a few steps ahead and not play into our own negative stereotypes that we like cheesy soap operas or cannot manage money. And we should not act like jefes or the patrón and then flaunt any power that we do acquire over our subordinates. This should be covered in management 101, but sometimes we forget because so few of us attain such high profile positions in the American power structure. I’m sure that the feeling of being Hillary Clinton’s alter ego was intoxicating to a degree for Patti Solis Doyle, but it also led to her downfall.

I also think that we as voters need to think about Hillary Clinton as a candidate. She keeps telling us that she will be “ready from day one” to be president, but valuing loyalty over the harsh realities isn’t something that we need in the next presidential administration. We have had a President who has built a tight inner circle that didn’t value dissent or lend much thought to our realities in the world. Can we afford to have this kind of leadership again?

Thankfully, today Alberto (aka Fredo or Gonzo) Gonzales has resigned his position as the current architect of the police state being constructed by the Bush Cheney administration. He has authorized criminal behavior as White House counsel and has refused to prosecute that same criminal behavior as Attorney General. He has created and navigated legal avenues for Bush Cheney and their administrations to use torture and indefinite detention based on innuendo and suspicion and now as attorney general, he refused to investigate those programs despite Congressional inquiries in these matters.

Gonzales’ objectivity as far back as George W. Bush’s DUI arrest record, the Texas Clemency and Execution Memos, the Texas Youth Commission scandal, the Warrantless NSA Domestic Eavesdropping Program, the denial of right to Habeas Corpus in the U.S. Constitution, the FBI domestic abuses, and the Dismissal of U.S. Attorneys reveal a man completely committed to the erosion of the civil liberties protections that activists in the 60s fought to preserve. The rule of law seems to be a line that Alberto Gonzales is truly committed to blurring. This man could not have resigned soon enough, but all the repercussions of his actions will certainly be felt in the years to come.

Most people realize why warrantless wiretapping is bad. It is terrible for all Americans in that phone discussions could be taken out of context and used as evidence to prosecute. People of color have been subject to similar investigations by the FBI with COINTELPRO. Really anyone who opposes the government could face the wrath of such a program.

I have always believed that if you are going to lie that you should get everyone on board or at least try to sound convincing. Alberto Gonzales has failed to do just that. It seems that there are some dissenters who chose not to follow him into the fire. From all that I have read, Alberto has no intention of leaving his job, so it looks like the expose will continue.