Senor Ricky Martin,
If what you are upset at was that a Latino was removed from a press conference, then why were you not upset when Mr/Ms. Jennicet Gutierrez was removed from the White House on 25 Jun 2015? Do you recall? That was whom President Obama said to “Shame on you…Listen, you’re in my house.” The President adding, “…if you’re eating the hors d’oeuvres and drinking the booze the least you can do is listen respectfully.” Do you recall that confrontation, Mr. Martin?
If what you are upset at was that Mr. Jorge Ramos was advocating for Latinos, before Mr. Trump dismissed him, then why were you not upset when Mr/Ms. Gutierrez was escorted out of the White House? Mr/Ms. Gutierrez was advocating for Latinos too, for Latinos in detention centers regardless their orientation.
If what you were upset at was that Mr. Ramos is a VIP, or better yet, the “Latino Walter Cronkite” as he is known in the Latino community, and because of that you believe he deserves being treated with greater respect. Then that must mean Mr/Ms. Gutierrez is no one and why you did not stand in solidarity with him/her?
Having said that, I understand why you would not support Mr/Ms. Gutierrez. The President himself saying, “Shame on you,” after Mr/Ms. Gutierrez just blurted out whatever it was s/he had to get off his/her chest. But wait, Mr. Ramos did the same thing when he just blurted out whatever he had on his chest too. Not that there is anything wrong with that as journalist try those tactics all the time to get their questions in.
Except Mr. Ramos, like Mr/Ms. Gutierrez, did not have a question. Instead Mr. Ramos had a hidden agenda. I know you and many like you will disagree but I watched the press conference live, not some edited version of it, and I found it odd when Mr. Ramos suddenly stood up. And after identifying himself, and his affiliation, he began to blurt out, “…you [meaning Mr. Trump] cannot deport 11 million…blah…blah…blah.”
It was because of that and not because of his ethnic affiliation, as so many want us to believe, that Mr. Ramos was asked to be quiet and sit down but he did not. On the other hand, as expected, everyone else at the press conference not only waited to be called but, unlike Mr. Ramos, they all had questions rather than criticisms. On top of that, no one, not one person, stood up before called and even those who were called remained sitting while asking their questions.
Not to mention, Mr. Ramos was given an opportunity to remain in the room as long as he sat, remained quiet and waited his turn, just like everyone else in attendance. But NOOOooo! Mr. Ramos instead chose to defy Mr. Trump and it was because of that he was escorted outside. Mr. Ramos later boasting he had never been removed from a press conference, something he will never be able to say again and he has Mr. Trump to thank for that.
Yet, when Mr/Ms. Gutierrez was escorted out of the White House not you Mr. Martin, or Mr. Ramos for that matter, or any other Latino shedded a tear or stood up for him/her for expressing him/herself just like Mr. Ramos says he was doing and who added that it was his right to ask questions. Do not get me wrong I did not stand with Mr/Ms. Gutierrez either. Actually, I did not know who Mr/Ms. Gutierrez was until I Googled the event at the White House knowing Mr. Ramos was not the first person ever ejected from a press conference. And although I recall the event I did not know the actors involved and much less Mr/Ms. Gutierrez’s agenda.
On that note, if what you are upset at was that Mr. Ramos has the right to ask questions you are correct he does have that right. However, Mr. Ramos should know the following: (1) he was not asked for his question, (2) his question does not have to be answered, and (3) just because questions are not answered to his satisfaction does not mean the question was not answered.
Nonetheless, last week, you thought you would stand up for all Latinos over Mr. Trump again. Again, because, I guess, your initial distaste for Mr. Trump when he initially announced his candidacy was not sufficient. This time you went as far as to state how your “blood boils over the gratuitously harassment of the Latin community” by Mr. Trump.
Well, Mr. Martin, you are not alone. You think your blood boils when Latinos are being bashed. I cannot tell you how it angers me, or as our delightful and beloved Puerto Rican comedian Awilda Carbia’s character Flor Rosa would say, “Me entra la fragancia” (figuratively meaning “I am about to explode”), when others bash the USA or us Gringos as we are called in Latin America. To include leaders of other nations, Latin America included, who say Gringos are murders, rapist and drug addicts just to name a few.
And despite such language towards the USA so many want to come to this racist, absurd, and above all, as you said, incoherent and ignorant nation, words you used to describe Mr. Trump—not that Mr. Trump embodies the USA but the words you used to label him are so commonly used by so many when they bash the USA.
That, despite the USA is the most generous nation on the planet as Brain Hansford, Spokesman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), described the USA on Al Jazeera News last week during a segment about Syrian refugees. Mr. Hansford mentioning the USA resettles 70,000 refugees yearly, more than any other country. And that is just refugees who are accepted legally and not the other tens of thousands who are accepted, legally as well, to migrate here every year for less desperate reasons.
Yet, despite that fact, for some unknown reason, rather accept those facts, the Al Jazeera anchor, Randall Pinkston, thought he would chime in that because of the USA’s extensive background check it inconveniently takes 12-18 months before those refugees are accepted in the USA. Mr. Pinkston adding, “longer than any other nation”; diminishing the fact that despite that inconvenience the USA still resettles MORE(!) refugees than any other country. It’s like the USA cannot please anyone, as some must always find something wrong with everything we do.
Mr. Martin, my point, disagreement is not a hate crime. Actually, disagreement is not a crime at all. Who has never disagreed with those we love most yet those relationships are not dismissed.
Another point, please speak for yourself and here is why. Like Mr. Ramos, and you, I too am a Latino. Like you I too am Puerto Rican. Unlike the two of you, and the droves of others who have risen against Mr. Trump, general statements by others do not offend me. Not Mr. Trump’s or anyone else for that matter. Here is why, when someone yells, “Hey A**hole,” do you turn around because you think they are talking about you? The same with blanket statements that Latinos, or any other group for that matter, are this or that. To those general statements not specifically directed at me I say, like our Flor Rosa would say, “Se me resbala” (figuratively meaning “It slides off.”).
In other words, that is that person’s problem not mine. I been on this planet long enough and have dismissed that blather many of times and why none of it keeps me down. In order for others to insult me, I would first have to value their opinion.
To be fair, here is a snippet from the other side of the aisle as well. Ellis Henican, Newsday columnist, just last week said, “We need them [illegal immigrants]. They do the jobs Americans won’t do.” As if illegal immigrants have some super coding in their DNA which grants them super powers in the areas of housecleaning, food service or agriculture, just to name a few.
Yet, somehow, you and others, have been convinced those comments from amnesty advocates are less racist (racism is defined as one race superior to another). Granted, being called murders, rapist and drug dealers is never good. But who, other than our advocates who speak so favorable of us, believes being called toilet cleaners, busboys or fruit pickers is any better.
A great friend of mine likes to remind me, “We [Latinos] are tolerated but not accepted in this country.” I disagree and instead subscribe to, “Don’t worry about the haters…They are just angry because the truth you speak contradicts the lie they live.”—Dr. Steve Maraboli. And as long as Latinos care or worry what others think about them they will be regarded as toilet cleaners. It does not matter that Sonia Sotomayor is a Supreme Court Justice—you go girl!
Now, Mr. Ramos is right, most here illegally came by planes and over stayed their visas. Just like he did. Although he does not commonly share that when he claims he has the rights to ask questions as a USA citizen and as an immigrant.
However, there are very few success stories like Mr. Ramos’ among illegal immigrants. Instead, what are more common are the overwhelming tragedies of living in the underground subculture of illegal immigration. Not only in the USA but in any country where illegal immigrants are exploited or violated, especially in Latin America where they are so hostile to illegal immigration.
Just last week, Venezuela cracked down on Colombian immigrants living in Venezuela. Not to mention, Mr. Martin, Venezuela’s President Maduro had a few choice words for Colombians, some of those words similar to the ones we heard from Mr. Trump. Yet, Latinos have not stood hand-in-hand to dismiss President Maduro for suggesting Colombians are murders, rapist and drug dealers.
And President Maduro has not only been deporting Colombians but he has also ordered their homes demolished so they cannot come back. Compared to that Mr. Trump doesn’t sound so bad after all. Not to mention, I have not heard you or other Latinos, to include Latin America’s most beloved and respected reporter, Mr. Ramos, get upset with President Maduro’s racist, absurd, and, above all, his incoherent and ignorant actions.
On that note, let me try to answer Mr. Ramos’ concerns. First, to be absolutely clear, the issue at hand is ILLEGAL immigration as NO one has an issue with legal immigration. Well, let me clarify that, NO one has an issue with legal immigration other than those claiming that legal immigration is unfair. Whatever that means! Anyhow, know that my stand on ILLEGAL immigration is more extreme than Mr. Trump’s. But that is another conversation. I want to also point out that Latinos should not claim illegal immigration as their own as other ethnic groups want the same. Yet, others sit back while Latinos bare the heavy lifting only to be excluded later and more so to be blamed for any disputes that will follow as well. Yes, that is my prediction but that too is for another conversation.
-As Mr. Ramos claims, eleven million people may not be deported. However, they can easily self-deport, to include their anchor babies. How? Easy. Make life uncomfortable for them by simply enforcing the current immigration laws, like fining business that hire them and restrict remittances to only those here legally.
-A 2,000 mile border wall can be built. China’s Great Wall, with all its branches, measures over 13,171 miles. So why can’t 2,000 miles be built? In the USA we have troves of examples of doing what so many think is impossible. John F. Kennedy reminded us, “…we choose to do these things not because they are easy but because they are hard.” Mr. Ramos may think a border wall is impossible but it was the USA who put a man on the moon and brought them back. And to the credit of the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans, they have great feats of engineering all over Latin America. Two words, Machu Picchu. Not to mention, as Mr. Trump said, “It is more difficult to build a building than a wall.” Yet, we have buildings everywhere. So why does Mr. Ramos think it is so hard?
But it’s too expensive he adds. So was getting a man on the moon and so was Teotihuacan. Not only expensive financially but loss of lives as well. And the idea of getting Mexico to pay for it is not absurd either. Why? The means are many.
How about the argument that more common then not illegals arrive by plane and stay their visas, like Mr. Ramos? If so, why is Mr. Ramos so concerned about a wall that will not work? If his concern is the waste of money, I have news for him, we already waste a boatload, no pun intended, of money on so many things, to include Latin America, but that is another story. Nonetheless, a wall will curtail the 500,000 or so who do cross the border illegally on foot every year.
Amnesty advocates tell us the reason people come to the USA illegally is because they do not meet the criteria to come in legally, so they find another method to obtain the same result on their terms. How convenient? Because a system does not meet your circumstances that does not mean the system is a broke system. Otherwise, I could use the same rationale when I get a speeding ticket by objecting, “If the speed limit were higher I wouldn’t be speeding.” But that is not how things work. Mr. Martin, imagine those who paid to watch your concert could not get a seat because those who could not afford your prices found a way of climbing over the fence and took those seats instead. That is what amnesty advocates claim as appropriate. However, I am sure, and I am sure that you would agree, that those left without seats after paying for them would not be happy.
If what Mr. Ramos objects to is that a border wall between the USA and Mexico would be intimidating he does not have to look at the border between USA and Mexico. Instead, he needs to look at the borders between Belize and Guatemala and Panama and Colombia—both demilitarized zones. Or look at the border between Venezuela and Colombia, one of the world’s most dangerous borders, or the border between Chile and Argentina. Clearly, all disputed borders waiting to ignite they are so volatile and all in Latin America.
-Mr. Ramos is correct; “anchor babies” could not be deported. Well, they could but the visual of doing so would not be good. However, their illegal parents should be deported. What the parents decide to do with their children, citizens or not, is an issue of the parents. After all, it was the parents who took the risk with their poor decision-making and why they find themselves in the predicament they find themselves.
The argument that families cannot be divided is a lame excuse as most illegal families already divide their family themselves to get here. It is all too common that parents will cross illegally alone hoping to later send for their families or the parents travel back and forth between countries keeping their families separated themselves. Not to mention, most recently, children have been sent on their own. So, what illegal immigration advocates are suggesting is that it is okay for illegals to divide their own families for their benefit but not okay for the USA to divide the same families. Please.
The all to common argument of a 4-year-old joining her parents to rob a bank, because the parents do not want to leave the child outside in a hot car, and the child maintaining her innocence of that crime is another lame example. Why? Well, because although the child is innocent there is no reason why the parents should not go to prison thus dividing the family, again, because of the parent’s poor decision making. If the parents were so concern of their family not being separated they should not have committed the crime of robbing the bank, or entering the country illegally. Again, please.
Not to mention, legal citizens are divided from their families all the time. Like when a legal USA citizen goes to prison, sometimes that is both parents, and the children are left behind. On any given day hundreds of thousands of children in the USA are in foster care for no fault of their own and no one objects to those families being divided. The children of our military are separated all the time as well, again, no fault of the children, when their parents are assigned to hardship tours, where families cannot join them, or are deployed to war and no one objects. So give me a single reason, just one, why illegal families cannot be divided when they divide themselves to their advantage. And more so that legal families are divided all the time.
I realize a touchy topic, however, EXAGGERATED UNREALISTIC EMOTIONAL EXPECTATIONS should not influence those decisions, which instead are to be made on what the laws are. Keep in mind, it is the illegal parents that would be deported, not the legal children, and thus the decision to divide the family, again, would be the parents’ decision. No one ever said the illegal parents could not take their “anchor babies” with them—of course they could. Just as they can leave them behind, as they have before, but this time in foster care, rather leaving them behind alone.
But the children, to include the ones who came here no fault of their own, like the bank robber’s child, cannot be sent to a country they are unfamiliar with or of where they do not speak the language—an even bigger lame excuse. Why is it then okay for illegal children to come here, many of them unaccompanied, to a country and a language they are unfamiliar with? If anything, those sent back will be at a greater advantage when they return to their native countries as many of those illegal children, and now adults, have the advantage of their education, a second language, improved healthcare and even superior video game playing skills. All advantages they and their parents did not have when they came here and despite lacking those skills many prospered, which shows they are motivated and talented. If anything, they would be at an advantage when repatriated. So rather make excuses for not sending them back, look at it from this point, their acquired skills put them at a greater advantage to help their countries prosper. Now, how is that bad?
I get it. Mr. Ramos is a USA citizen. Even if he accomplished such by overstaying his visa and then gaining amnesty after [staying] here illegally, he is a USA citizen. That is his, as I always say, not every basket Michael Jordan made was a calculated shot. However, even the lucky shots count, regardless if they were lucky shots or not he gets credit. Having said that, Mr. Ramos was at the right place at the right time thus he got lucky and no one can EVER or will EVER take that away from him. However, if he were so proud of his country, Mexico, why would he give up his citizenship? There is NO WAY IN HELL that if Puerto Rico became an independent nation I would give up my USA citizenship just to gain Puerto Rican citizenship! NOT NO but HELL NO!
I realize some will say I am a sale out, and that is just fine. However, I believe that in order for others to insult me I would first have to value their opinion.
While growing up in New York in the 70s I played the part of El Jibarito in a 2 grade school play. Still today, out of nowhere, and for no reason, other than my roots, I bust out into the song I sang in that play, Salgo, loco de contento con mi gargamento pa’ la gran ciudad. Pa’ la gran ciudad. Back then, we assimilated and were part of our communities while still holding on to our heritage. Today, people want to flaunt their heritage in everyone’s face. And when others push back for you putting your egotistic bravado self in their face we call them racist.
I thought that in a “melting pot” there is a single flavor and only a hint of each “individual” ingredient rather an overwhelming presence of any. But today many are ruining the stew by adding too much “sofrito” to the melting pot, like having their own ethnic group-only graduations at Harvard.
Do not get me wrong, I believe, as I heard Ruben Blades (the Panamanian musical artist, songwriter, lawyer, actor, and politician) say decades ago, “[Just like persons in Europe are Europeans, people in Asia are Asians, and persons in Africa are Africans then Americans must be all from Northern, Central, and Southern America and not just the self-proclaimed (United States of America).]” On top of that, I also believe patriots are all USA citizens regardless of political alliance or dissent. And labeling someone as unpatriotic or un-American should be reserved for those convicted of treason and should not be used irresponsibly to label your political opponent without restraint or consequences because of disagreement on ideology. Because, as already mentioned, disagreement is not a hate crime. So when I been told to go back to my country my answer always is, “I am already here,” and I move on, because as Mark Twain said, “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat with their experience.”
I would think that if you are so committed to those of your ethnicity, that you turn around whenever someone yells, “Hey A**hole,” than you need to be there for all of your ethnicity. Like standing with Mr/Ms. Gutierrez, a Latino/a. That means you have to stand with the lowlife’s as well. Yes, the lowlife, like the one who killed Kate Steinle in San Francisco and with the lowlife who raped and killed Marilyn Pharis in Santa Maria. If you think Mr. Trump was referring to you when he mentioned murders, rapist, and drug pusher than that means you have to stand with the lowlife illegal alien who killed/s, raped/s, robbed/s regardless if against USA citizen or those here illegally. That, Mr. Martin, is what you, and every Latino, not should do but MUST do, dismiss as “enough is enough” as you said. And you shouldn’t worry so much about Mr. Trump’s words or actions that put an amnesty advocate, like Mr. Ramos, in his place rather than attacked his dignity as you mentioned.
For attacks on Latinos’ dignity you only have to look at Latinos who have left a bad taste in the mouth of others, and there are many who exploit and violate their own, like Venezuelan President Maduro. Only mentioned because he is currently being a tyrant. Not because he is deporting Colombians but because he is demolishing their homes—now that is an attack on anyone’s dignity! Yet, you and other Latinos, to include Mr. Ramos, have not dismissed that barbarity as you describe Mr. Trump’s words.
If our ethnicity, Latino, is to be respected then we need to tidy ourselves first. Because, although everywhere in the world there are murders, rapist, drug addicts and drug pushers, you cannot discount those as stereotypes, especially since Latin America accounts for 33% of the world’s murders despite it is home to only 8% of the global population. So, when Mr. Trump alleged that Mexico is sending over murders, rapist and drug pushers, in some sense he was right. I am sure there are nice people in there too, as Mr. Trump mentioned, but criminals overshadow them. I am sure Puerto Ricans and other Latinos fit the same bill. I know the truth hurts and you and others will disagree but the facts are the facts.
Believe me when I say am not trying to be a smartass, but you mentioned some high-impact attention-getting words I hope to clarify, such as, calling Latino our race, rights Latinos fought for and “first generation”, all attention-getters.
First, I dismiss Latino as a race (despite the cry of “La Raza”) as race refers to similar and distinct physical characteristics or phenotypes thus that excludes the label, yes label, of Latino. I mention it and make the distinction because within Latinos we have many race issues as well—white, black and indigenous (Mongolian), but that too another story, and why pointing to others as racist for simply disagreement is not fair.
As for your mention that Latinos fought so hard for rights, would you please list those rights Latinos solely fought for that others have not? One would be plenty, as I cannot come up with a single one myself.
And when you mention “first generation” Latinos you must know that those “first generation” Latinos were the Texans when annexed into the USA in 1845 and why a fifth-generation Texan, great friend of mine, says, “I did not cross border. The border crossed me.” If what you mean by “first generation” is my parents or the parent’s of “anchor babies” I believe they have contributed, or fought for, as you stated, even for less rights than those of my friend’s great x4 grandparents. But I could be wrong so please enlighten me.
Another thing, being against illegal anything, be it pirated music or illegal immigration, is not Xenophobia. Being against illegal is just being honest that’s all. I understand illegal immigration is an emotional topic but see it this way, if there were only legal immigration I doubt anyone would be upset where you came from. In that sense I am not naïve. How can I be? I am a Puerto Rican from New York (Nuyorican) and I have travelled the planet so I know some are prejudice and some are even racist, however, that is not Mr. Trump.
All I am saying is, “Be careful not to say something permanently stupid because you are temporary angry, stressed, scared, tired or hungry.”—Karen Salmansohn
On that note, as mentioned before, disagreement does not equal hating anything or anyone. Disagreement is but disagreement and we have all disagreed with those we love most, at one point or another, and that is not hate. Why then is disagreement from others seen as hate? I might disagree with the President but that is no more hate than when I disagree with my parents. How about for the sake of humanity we simply agree to disagree rather hate one another and carry on with these wars of words.
Mr. Martin, granted we can pick and choose which causes and who we are going to stand with but in doing so you have to be consistent. More important, neither you, I, nor so-called, or self-claimed, Latin America’s beloved Mr. Ramos, can pick and choose which laws we are going to honor. Again, that is not how any of this works.
After all that, know that it is very unlikely Mr. Trump will be the Republican candidate for the presidency of the USA in 2016 and much less be elected President. Having said that, if Mr. Trump is one of the choices he has my vote. Unless he opts to be the independent vote, as that will automatically give the Presidency to Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden and neither of them appeal to me. However, as much as I will dislike it, if either of the latter is President I will rally behind them, within reason of course, rather say I am leaving the country as some have mentioned before. It does not pay to be a sore loser.
I am sure you will find it hard to believe but I am NEITHER a Republican or a Democrat. Instead, I am an Independent who considered voting for Barack Obama in 2008, or at least until he opened his mouth in telling Iran to unclench its fist, but that is another story as well. Nonetheless, I painfully voted for John McCain despite not a fan of his. If I were to pick our next President my choice would be Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson or Marco Rubio, in that order. However, I hope they have the courage, yes, courage, to carry out Mr. Trump’s plan on illegal immigration. Having said that, I have to point out that HOPE and CHANGE were previous campaign slogans and how has that gone? Not so good!
However, if Mr. Trump did win the Presidency it will be a very bad day for Latinos. Not because of his stance on illegally immigration but because Latinos will forever lose their clout as a political force after such failure to discredit him. Actually, I could say that now, as Latinos have not been able to affect Mr. Trump’s polling numbers despite they are the largest minority and all of their foot stomping. Instead, what Latinos, legal and illegal, have accomplished thus far with their race baiting rhetoric is alienate, no pun intended, themselves even more from non-Latinos and the country they want to be part of. Keep in mind, Mr. Trump’s issue is with illegal immigration and not legal immigration.
Believe me I get your point that Mr. Trump’s comments and actions are a bit inflammatory, but like I said, that is only a fact because the truth is hard to swallow. I also get that his language can foment hatred that lingers forever. However, the same could be said for yours, Mr. Ramos, and the likes too. Keep in mind, that the only terrorist organization to ever shoot up our nation’s congress was Puerto Ricans under the leadership of Pedro Albizu Campos, the first Puerto Rican to graduate from Harvard University. And although that organization is less active today it continues to exist. I know, I know, terrorist too is a high-impact and attention-getting word. And I will cede this, by definition our nation’s forefathers were terrorist too. However, the difference between terrorist and patriots is convincing the populists your group’s actions are in the interest of the whole verses an extremist group unable to convince the populists.
Mr. Martin, thank you for listening and I apologize this was not  characters or less. However, despite its length it is not a manifesto either. I am a simple person and just do not want others speaking for me or us for that matter. Of course, it would be great if you agreed with me, however, I would not fall apart if you agree to disagree either because like a**holes we all have an opinion. This was my two sense [sic], as I prefer to say, and you can take it or leave it. However, as I have said, because someone yells, “Hey A**hole,” it does not mean they were talking to you or about you.
Don’t worry about Mr. Ramos just because his ego was hurt, although not the first time, as he has had a number of those run ins, some literally, before and all were in Latin countries. Not to mention, despite his aggressive journalism, as he calls it, in the USA he will be safe, as it is in Mexico where journalist live in fear. “Mexico…[becoming] one of the world’s most dangerous places for reporters”. And that is not the case in the USA, not even at a press conference with Mr. Trump. On that note, if Mr. Ramos truly wants to be an advocate for having the “right to ask question” than it would be Mexico where he needs to take that fight, especially after the murder of a fellow journalist, Ruben Espinosa. Now, if what Mr. Ramos is pursuing is to be an advocate for ILLEGAL immigration than he is in the right place.
Just to put your mind at ease, and those of your fans, and even Mr. Ramos’ fans, not that I owe that to anyone, as mentioned, although hard to believe for some, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat but an Independent. And that means I make independent decisions rather tow the line of any one idiotology [sic]. As for being a minority, oppressed or a victim, if what is meant to be either is to be poor than I been there, done that and even have the t-shirts to prove it. However, I would caution against that definition of being poor means being oppressed or a victim as many whites, men, women and children in the USA are poor too yet no one seems to rally for them as being oppressed or victims. Not to mention, legal and illegal immigrants in the USA are exponentially better off than most in their native countries. And although it makes for protest and drama I would not say they are oppressed or victims while they are here, at least not oppressed or victims of the government.
From my writing you might concluded that I do not have Latino friends. And you are right. I do not have friends that are white, black, red, or yellow either. Nor do I have friends that are bi, straight, or gay and no Jewish, Christian, Buddhist or Muslim friends either as I only have friends. And what they put in their mouths, it be only Kosher, ham hocks or no pork at all, arroz blanco con un huevo frito, or whatever else is no concern of mine. And neither is whatever comes out of their mouth either. I have friends whose company I enjoy and their individualities are no issue of mine or anyone else’s. But most important, I do not have friends just so I can qualify myself in the world of others and much less for political points or votes.
One more thing, while I have your attention, not knowing, or caring for that matter, what “Premios Juventud is, other than another, “I was left out of the main stream award shows, because there are not enough already, so let me create my own so that I can worship myself, excuse.” Nonetheless, Premios Juventud is probably not a good venue for Pitbull, whoever that is, to make such childish playground threats like, “My dad is bigger than your dad…so my dad will kick your dad’s ass,” when he suggested Mr. Trump should be careful of El Chapo. Really? Of all the Latin heroes to chose to fight Latin America’s latest demon, Mr. Trump, I guess, Pitbull chooses a criminal. Para colmo, in front of such an impressionable audience that young people are—that is me guessing whom Premio Juventud’s targeted audience is but I could be wrong, although I could not care less.
To Pitbull, again, who or what ever that is, if I had Mr. Trump’s money I would assemble the world’s greatest private citizen anti-narcotrafficking team to rid our planet of all that scum. Plucking them all out of the cesspool they float in and bringing them to justice in the USA, from where they will never escape. You see Pitbull, narcotraffickers are not persons we should aspire to be, admire or even give the time of day too, much less in front of such an impressionable audience. Maybe, just maybe, you should have mention Justice Sotomayor as that is who Mr. Trump will likely have to face if he is elected President. Ms. Sotomayor is not only a great person and a great example of accomplishment SHE IS LATINA! Again, just my two sense [sic] among so many narcissists wanting to be relevant.