From Breitbart News, we learn:
ABC News: …When asked about Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Richardson expressed his distaste for the senator.
“I’m not a fan. I know [Ted Cruz is] sort of the Republican latest flavor. He’s articulate. He seems to be charismatic, but I don’t like his politics. I think he introduces a measure of incivility in the political process. Insulting people is not the way to go. But I guess he’s a force in the Republican political system, but I’m not a fan.”
ABC News: Do you think he represents most Hispanics with his politics?
“No, no. He’s anti-immigration. Almost every Hispanic in the country wants to see immigration reform. No, I don’t think he should be defined as a Hispanic. He’s a politician from Texas. A conservative state. And I respect Texas’ choice. But what I don’t like is… when you try to get things done, it’s okay to be strong and state your views, your ideology. But I’ve seen him demean the office, be rude to other senators, not be part of, I think, the civility that is really needed in Washington.”
You’re quite right, Senor Richardson: Mr. Cruz is not ‘a Hispanic’; he is an American of Cuban, Irish, and Italian descent.
The Senator from Texas does not play your Balkanization Game and, because of that, you and the rest of your disloyal Progressive pals despise him and are now actively working to destroy him.
As Carlos Eire remarks over at Babalu Blog:
Well, these neo-racists can all breathe a sigh of relief. Hissing at Cruz can now continue, guilt-free, unimpeded by any panic over his ethnicity or race.
Finally, we now have definitive proof that most Cubans are not Hispanics, and that Ted Cruz does not qualify as a “person of colour.”
The proof comes from Bill Richardson, one of the most prominent Hispanic/Latino leaders in the United States, who —despite the fact that he has a totally un-Hispanic name— has devised a simple formula for determining who is or isn’t Hispanic.
His formula: if you are a political conservative, you are not Hispanic.
So, there you have it. If you lean to the right, or fail to support uncontrolled immigration you can no longer list yourself as a “person of colour” or “Hispanic” or “Latino/a.” It’s a new version of an old formula, previously used to determine blackness among African Americans.
Like the good little Droogie you are, Senor Richardson, you’ve been given your talking points by your Leftist Masters and you went on ABC and repeated them — probably word-for-word, parrot-like. Hopefully for your sake, your betters will give you a cracker, Cracker.
Guillermo, no eres más que una puta que está lleno de mierda.
ERRATA: At 1725 — in the post title, spelling correction from ‘Taking’ to ‘Talking’.
UPDATE at 1935…
Jeff Goldstein’s explanation is right on the money ['pesos'?]:
Much is being made of Bill Richardson’s candid statement that Texas Senator Ted Cruz, a conservative and TEA Party favorite, shouldn’t be “defined as an Hispanic” — his positions on many issues having deviated, by Richardson’s lights, from the standard (and ascendant) identity narrative for “Hispanic authenticity,” which creates in Cruz a man of Hispanic heritage and blood who, because his politics don’t follow a particular progressive policy prescription, can’t claim a connection to the identity group.
And Richardson is correct. Being “Hispanic,” while initially created as a group designation by Nixon for purposes of separating out a particular cultural and ethnic voter bloc, has come to mean something else with respect to politics, much as has being “black” or being a woman: from the perspective of the left, the personal is the political, and so if the personal narrative of an individual claiming group kinship doesn’t match the political identity, itself formed and promoted by self-styled ethnic or gender or cultural group leaders who have created from disparate individuals a collective that is to operate under a specific group narrative (for purely political purposes), s/he is bracketed, labeled inauthentic, or at the very least damaged, suffering from the kind of false consciousness that prevents her or him from acting in their own best interests, which are cagily conflated with the political interests of the groups and their leaders.
And these interests are always political group interests — advocating for special dispensation, for recognized historical and contemporary victimhood, for protected class status. That is, collectivist identity politics, the bailiwick of the left.
This concept of ‘false consciousness’ is important to know if one is to understand much of Leftist Thinking. It is a term that is not used too often these days, perhaps because it is so closely associated with Marxism, but it is a concept still being drummed into the brains of many clueless people under different names.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, has a succinct and well-crafted definition of the phrase:
false consciousness
n.
In Marxist theory, a failure to recognize the instruments of one’s oppression or exploitation as one’s own creation, as when members of an oppressed class unwittingly adopt views of the oppressor class.
The Oxford English Dictionary’s entry:
a way of thinking that prevents a person from perceiving the true nature of their social or economic situation.
So what Senor William Blaine Richardson is saying is that Ted Cruz is a monumentally ignorant Dupe of the Right. But, in Reality, it is Senor Puta who is the ignoramus, as Jeff explains:
Far from an insult, Cruz is being complimented, though Richardson, a collectivist who believes in mob coercion and homogeneous identity markers — that is, demanded intellectual and political conformity — doesn’t recognize that he [has] complimented Cruz, who can lay claim to the very individualism that lies at the heart of our founding ideals.
Cruz, therefore, is being attacked for being the kind of American the Founders and Framers envisioned a free people producing and nurturing. And as such, he provides a stark contrast to the expectations of lockstep political sameness required by the left on its march to create Utopia.
That’s a good thing. And Cruz should celebrate his differences. He is an Hispanic in the sense that he shares blood with the groups typically falling under that label. But he isn’t “Hispanic” in the contemporary sense of the word, which privileges fidelity to a given cultural narrative formed as the basis for pushing a progressive collectivist agenda.
Mr. Cruz is, as I stated above, an American. While, I’m sure, he honors his blood heritage, the Senator from Texas honors more the heritage of those who founded The United States Of America. Like us, he considers himself to be a descendant of The Founders. Unlike the Leftists, Mr. Cruz is loyal to God and to America and to his family — not to any Ideology, especially one that demands that one reject God and country and family.
The Left In America has deemed that Ted Cruz, like Sarah Palin, is a threat to their schemes, so they have targeted him for destruction, sent out the talking points to their apparatchiks, and will not be satisfied until his reputation lies dead and it’s grave desecrated.
