Spring Break
Republican Hypocrisy Exposed
Avelino Maestas
Issue date: 10/28/04 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
In the latest issue of The Trunk Truth, College Republicans President Abe Villarreal and Advisor Steve Chavez present an interesting lesson in hypocrisy. On one hand you have Mr. Chavez arguing that people who play the "race card" are using racism to win debates without providing substantive arguments. In the exact same issue, we see Mr. Villarreal call Senator Kerry, "the most liberal member of the US Senate," suggest that "liberals should learn to change" with the rest of the world, and then debunk "liberal myths" and "lies."
It seems to me that if anybody is playing a card, it's the College Republicans.
Looking at The Trunk Truth's endorsement of President Bush, the only substantive arguments provided contradict each other. Senator Kerry has "consistently voted to raise taxes," and is so "liberal" he "is out of the mainstream." Yet, somehow, Kerry also tries "a new position when the political wind blows" and "can't stand for what he believes in." Which is it Abe: is he consistent or wishy-washy?
In regard to the recent controversy surrounding the name of the Student Memorial Building, Mr. Chavez would have you believe that MEChA and other students here on campus felt that the process was marred by racism. No word of this claim has reached my ears.
Of course, in the October 11 issue of The Trunk Truth Mr. Villarreal simplified MEChA's argument further. He said that, "they believe the Chavez/King option is the most appropriate because, if chosen, the building would be named after two minorities." Did he provide a quote from a member of the club to support this claim? No.
Rather, MEChA recognized the contributions made to civil rights and the improvement of labor laws by Cesar Chaves and Martin Luther King. The Chavez/King supporters saw these men as icons of Americana, men whose lives affected everybody. While MEChA said that WNMU is a Hispanic Serving Institution today because of King and Chavez, this was a subset of their argument and not the argument itself. How do I know? They said so in the October 7 issue of The Mustang.
Finally, students were arguing that their voice had been ignored in the past, and that their voice would be ignored again. In my opinion, this is true, and their fears indeed came to pass. The Board of Regents bowed to outside pressure, and chose to name the building after a former student who accomplished some extraordinary things (and was also popular with the state legislature). However, nobody has called Regent Trujillo a "racist" for voting for McDonald.
In fact, the College Republicans are the ones using the "race card" for their arguments. Rather than examine the benefits that Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King provided to our nation and our university, Mr. Villarrael called the Chavez/King proposal "Just Another Case of Affirmative Action." The Trunk Truth could have explored the cries of student dissent raised in the last several months - instead, in two issues The Truth has called the proposal racially motivated.
But they can get away with it, because they're Hispanic too.
It seems to me that if anybody is playing a card, it's the College Republicans.
Looking at The Trunk Truth's endorsement of President Bush, the only substantive arguments provided contradict each other. Senator Kerry has "consistently voted to raise taxes," and is so "liberal" he "is out of the mainstream." Yet, somehow, Kerry also tries "a new position when the political wind blows" and "can't stand for what he believes in." Which is it Abe: is he consistent or wishy-washy?
In regard to the recent controversy surrounding the name of the Student Memorial Building, Mr. Chavez would have you believe that MEChA and other students here on campus felt that the process was marred by racism. No word of this claim has reached my ears.
Of course, in the October 11 issue of The Trunk Truth Mr. Villarreal simplified MEChA's argument further. He said that, "they believe the Chavez/King option is the most appropriate because, if chosen, the building would be named after two minorities." Did he provide a quote from a member of the club to support this claim? No.
Rather, MEChA recognized the contributions made to civil rights and the improvement of labor laws by Cesar Chaves and Martin Luther King. The Chavez/King supporters saw these men as icons of Americana, men whose lives affected everybody. While MEChA said that WNMU is a Hispanic Serving Institution today because of King and Chavez, this was a subset of their argument and not the argument itself. How do I know? They said so in the October 7 issue of The Mustang.
Finally, students were arguing that their voice had been ignored in the past, and that their voice would be ignored again. In my opinion, this is true, and their fears indeed came to pass. The Board of Regents bowed to outside pressure, and chose to name the building after a former student who accomplished some extraordinary things (and was also popular with the state legislature). However, nobody has called Regent Trujillo a "racist" for voting for McDonald.
In fact, the College Republicans are the ones using the "race card" for their arguments. Rather than examine the benefits that Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King provided to our nation and our university, Mr. Villarrael called the Chavez/King proposal "Just Another Case of Affirmative Action." The Trunk Truth could have explored the cries of student dissent raised in the last several months - instead, in two issues The Truth has called the proposal racially motivated.
But they can get away with it, because they're Hispanic too.
