Conservative Black Forum, 1/23/2012. Hosted by Allen West, Moderated by Star Parker.

At 1:43:22 Parker opened the floor to Q&A. The first person was a woman who directly questioned and challenged Cleaver on the Hyde Amendment and his support of funding Planned Parenthood/etc. He dodged the question and very condescendingly instructed her on how politics work. She stood up again and restated her question and demanded that he specifically answer. He said that he would vote against abortion but he would not defund clinics (Planned Parenthood, specifically) that provide other services for the poor. He was forceful and clear. The next audience member was a man who challenged Cleaver to, “as a man of God”, do his due research on the origins of Planned Parenthood as a eugenics program. Other members of the panel pressed Cleaver further. Cleaver left during the Q&A at 1:54:20.

Jacob Turk announced that he is running for Congress against the incumbent Emanuel Cleaver for Missouri’s fifth district. Turk, a former U.S. Marine, engineer, and small business owner, has spent the past few election cycles getting to know the critical needs and strengths of the fifth district of Missouri while transition from the private sector into the political arena.

Turk is focusing his campaign on issues of on fiscal responsibility and congressional integrity. He is a staunch supporter of Second Amendment rights, he opposes regulation of business and healthcare, and he has stated that he supports an audit of the Fed.

The political establishment in Missouri are sufficiently afraid of Jacob Turk that, after he came very close to defeating Cleaver in 2010, the State redistricting was designed so that Turk’s personal residence was specifically placed out of 5th district… the newly drawn district line sits just a few blocks from Turk’s home.

After his death in 2007, the president of my undergraduate university published a reminder that no students, staff, or faculty were permitted to carry firearms on the campus of Missouri State University – as if murderers heed such rules. I wrote a letter of protest to the policy which was published in the Springfield News-Leader. Several people challenged my position by suggesting that we become like Japan. I argued that gun control has failed in Japan, and that no charade of safety is worth the critical human rights that are violated in Japan on a daily basis.

College campuses need concealed carry.

Gun control is a failure.

In Bolivia, an American using English in a court of law giving testimony regarding either a civil or a criminal case in which they are the defendant – and therefore the stakes are higher – is only acceptable if the American is extremely incapable of understanding and speaking in Spanish. In one such situation, the courts objected and only barely agreed o the use of English and an interpreter when the American had lived in Bolivia for just 4 years. Had that American been proven able to speak even a single sentence of Spanish then they would have been refused an interpreter. As it stood, the American was permitted only the use of a court-appointed interpreter.

Notice that Aguirre does speak English at key points in this video. Notice, most importantly (and carefully – it’s quiet), that he almost attempts to comply with Senator Harris’ demand and begins to speak in English when his companion (interpreter) stops him and instructs him to use Spanish.

This is not a situation in which a speaker risks perjuring or implicating himself. He is offering testimony as an advocate for a political opinion. He is advocating a preference. Not only was his decision rude, it was foolish to his cause.

Texas isn’t just about legalities. Our families moved to Mexico, and later to Texas, in order to become Mexicans and Texans. Our Texian and Tejano ancestors advocated for Mexican and then fought for Texan liberty. They formed the Republic of Texas and later joined the United States. The decision to transition to a primarily English-speaking society was made over 150 years ago. Latin culture remained and blended into Texas just as American culture remained and blended. Texas is a blending of very different cultures into a unique, separate, voluntary identity. Aguirre was testifying about a Texan political issue and has lived in Texas for over two decades. Why then is he not making the effort to become a Texan, or if he is making that effort and is trying to learn the language (which is not easy) then why does he not express that?

Also, please listen to the end of the following video. You don’t need to understand Spanish to notice a difference between the testimony of Aguirre and the English translation given by his interpreter. Just listen for “Arizona”. Aguirre says, in Spanish, that he lives in Texas “because Texas can be better than Arizona.” His interpreter translates this to, “because Texas can do better.” Either his interpreter is rubbish, or the interpreter deliberately cleaned up Aguirre’s testimony because the final comment regarding Arizona was politically dicey and would have further offended some politicians and citizens.

The interpreter did previously change the testimony; Aguirre began that chunk of testimony by stating that “family is the nucleus of this society” and the interpreter translates this to “family is an inclusive society”. Again, either the interpreter is a lousy Spanish-speaker and needs a new job, or he’s deliberately changing Aguirre’s testimony to make Aguirre sound less intelligent.

I think that the “nucleus” becoming “inclusive” was an honest, albeit very careless, mistake. Omitting a whole statement, “because Texas can be better than Arizona”, which was at the very end of a sentence and therefore more difficult to miss, cannot be an accident. I am persuaded that the interpreter changed Aguirre’s testimony because he knew that Aguirre’s own words would offend the committee. This is one important example why Aguirre’s use of Spanish was offensive.

ChildHelp provides important statistics on their website. “A report of child abuse is made every ten seconds. Almost five children die everyday as a result of child abuse. Child abuse occurs at every socioeconomic level, across ethnic and cultural lines, within all religions and at all levels of education.” Every individual in the United States knows someone who has been abused. Everyone knows that child abuse exists. Abuse still exists; therefore, lack of awareness is not the problem. Worse still, if people post their happy cartoon character and think that they’re doing their just portion then they will probably stop with just the cartoon and not do anything about the actual problem.

The problem is that few people are willing to enact solutions to stop child abuse.

The cartoon is a gimmick. The popularity of the cartoon means that it’s good gimmick. Any gimmick has to lead to action in order to be helpful – like how the Geico Gecko causes us to get a Geico quote on car insurance.

Use the gimmick to encourage genuine action. If you change your profile picture to that of a childhood cartoon, do not just leave it at that. Commit to posting a link to a useful organization. Initiate discussions about legislative changes. Donate to a helpful and active group. Talk about ways that individuals can voluntarily support victims and punish abusers.

Your profile picture alone will not help the child who is too damaged to bother crying. Do something with the attention your cartoon brings in order to actively help that child.

Cut it down to 3mins and have better makeup and this is great.