UNLESS IT'S AGAINST WHITEY!
Posted on 06/12/2006 1:26:43 PM PDT by againstallhope
NY Times, June 12, 2006 by Jonathan P. Hicks
"A group of black and Hispanic elected officials from Brooklyn are scheduled to meet this morning to devise strategies to keep a white candidate from winning a Congressional seat of historical significance in black politics.
It is not the first such meeting of these officials, nor is it likely to be the last. That there are talks so steeped in ethnicity indicates that race is not just one of the issues in determining who will succeed Representative Major R. Owens. It seems to be the dominant one.
Mr. Owens, a veteran of more than two decades in Congress who turns 70 this month, is not running for re-election. The black and Hispanic officials gathering today are discussing how to prevent David Yassky, a white city councilman from Brooklyn Heights, from winning a seat that once belonged to Shirley Chisholm, the first black woman elected to Congress."
See link for rest of article.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Ain't tolerance grand?
Could you imagine the outrage if whites got together to explicitly plan how to keep a black from winning a seat?
"Blacks that hate whites can never be racist. "
Of course they are, this seat is just one more entitlement program to the Dems....
Why are the Hispanics in on this conspiracy?
Isn't this a felony? A conspiracy to deprive someone of their civil rights? Where's the Justice Department? /crickets
Celebrate Diversity...
Not only is this racism but also bigotry. I'll bet money that Yassky is Jewish and there is only one thing these blacks hate more than white people is a Jewish white person. Welcome to the world of Democrat politics!!
So, it doesn't matter what the voters of that district want, right? It's up to the politicians to decide who is the right candidate?
From the left? Naaawww
Could it be... satan?
You are right, he is. He was also some kind of aide to Schumer. The dims are shameless hypocrites.
It's amazing how objective the reporter is...
Major Owens...
"There were 200 million people thrown overboard just coming across. So great was the number of people that were thrown overboard, that it altered the ecology of the ocean. Sharks to this day trace after ships seeking the flesh that was thrown overboard during the 200 years of the slave trade."
You are right about the double standard. If such a meeting took place among Republicans it would be the lead story on every nightly newscast and portrayed quite negatively - and rightfully so. From what portion of the article you have posted here, it is almost presented as a positive event. It's an outrage.
Okay, the blacks don't want a Jewish congressman. Anti-semitism is everywhere in the Democratic party, yet most Jews still vote Democrat.
CAN ANYBODY TELL ME WHY?
It's a mystery to me too. Most evangelical christians are Republicans and pro-Israel.
The Republicans should put up a black conservative candidate for the general election. That way, if Yassky wins the Dem primary, we can see if the black and Hispanic officials actually mean what they say about the district being "best served by a black representative."
Oh, my, no! Not that kind of black!
Major Owens has always been a "FOOL" there were not even 100 million people living in Afirca at that time and esp. not on the coast
LOL! That would be over 2700 people thrown overboard every day for 200 years. What a freakin' idiot!
This is what happens when states do not allow run-offs for primary elections. Were there a run-off when no candidate got 50%+1 in the primary (or 40%+1, as is the case in North Carolina), Yassky would face the second-place finisher in a run-off, and if a majority of voters wanted a black Congressman they would be able to elect one. But without a run-off, Yassky might "win" with under 30% of the vote. Similarly, not having a run-off allows RINOs to slip into office despite the fact that over 70% of voters preferred one of several conservative Republican candidates. Conservatives should join forces with black groups to insist upon a run-off when no candidate in the primary gets a majority of the vote, while opposing any attempt to implement run-offs in general elections (which is how Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu got elected in Louisiana in the first place).
And, of course, the same applies for Tennessee, where a white liberal will probably replace Harold Ford, Jr. in the black-majority 9th CD.
There is a double standard, but this is not about double standards. This seat belongs to A-A voters. It is that simple. None other can be permitted.
In 2004, Major Owens' vote total was 144,999 to 4,721 for his opponent (Conservative Party).
It reads like something out of The Onion.
A funny story: When Yassky first ran for office he campaigned in the subway station near my complex. This was the summer of Chandra Levy/Gary Condit 24-7 and I heard Yassky telling a voter how, if he were elected, he would fight against corruption. I knew full well he was running for City Council, but because he was a socialist I wanted to have some fun with him. I walked up to him and asked him if he was talking about Gary Condit and if he was going to try to get that disgrace to resign from Congress. Yassky gave me a shocked look and said, "No!!!"
CAN ANYBODY TELL ME WHY?
I'll tell you why.
When large numbers of Jews immigrated to the United States from Eastern Europe, they came into large cities such as New York and huddled together in urban neighborhoods such as the lower East Side. They looked out from their ghettoes at America through the eyes of the old country, and failed to distinguish white Christian Americans from the Russians, Poles, Ukrainians and other white Eastern European Christian peoples that had conducted pogroms against them, persecuted them, restricted them to pales and prohibited them by law from certain occupations and, generally, from rising in society.
These Jews that came to America were generally very poor when they arrived, and indeed were not significantly better off than many black Americans at the time. Yet because of the traditional Jewish emphasis on learning and merchant activities, within only a generation or two these impoverished Eastern European Jews became very successful in America, far outperforming black Americans, becoming successful businessmen, lawyers, doctors, academics and entertainers.
Yet in their minds, the history of oppression suffered in the old country was transformed into a mythology of oppression in the new country. While these Jews were perhaps the most successful immigrant class in American history, nevertheless the failure to be admitted to an exclusive country club or listed on a social register of high society was exaggerated into a form of persecution in the minds and self-identity of this new generation of successful Jews -- continuing the tradition of being oppressed, as they were in the old country, and, unfair as the comparison is to white Christian Americans, nevertheless equating to some extent the white Christian Americans who welcomed them to this country and allowed them full economic and political participation, but yet were excluding them from their country clubs and social registers, with the white Christian Eastern Europeans who had in fact really persecuted their forebears.
So these amazingly successful and talented Jews actually viewed themselves as being among the downtrodden, being oppressed by white Christian America, and saw themselves as the champions of other groups "oppressed" by white Christian America, in particular blacks. They were attracted to theories like Marxism which promised to overturn the existing pecking order of society, in favor of one in which the scholars would be in charge.
This is how the Jews came to appoint themselves the champions of black Americans in the struggle for civil rights. The ultimate "oppressors" against which the Jews could realize this self-identity, were of course white Southerners who supported segregation. So northern Jews went South to lead "Freedom Rides" and provide legal and political assistance to blacks fighting segregation. And even though only a relatively small number of Jews actually participated, nevertheless northern Jews as a whole identified with them, as they were fighting for the downtrodden against the oppressors.
But in fact black Americans had their own leaders, like Martin Luther King, Jr., who were themselves quite eloquent and effective in leading the fight against segregation and for full political participation. And the atheistic Marxism that many of these Jews were pushing was largely foreign to American blacks. Naturally, a certain resentment seems to have arisen among blacks toward these northern Jews who claimed to be leading the black struggle for civil rights and seemed to equate the "oppression" of Jews in America with the historic, centuries-long sufferings of black people in America.
So therefore we now have a certain element of anti-Semitism among blacks. And Jews continue to self-identify (and vote) as liberals because, as any good psychologist or historian will tell you, a mythology of being a member of a people who were downtrodden and rose up to become successful in the face of powerful forces of oppression doing everything to keep them down, is a more powerful persona than simply being a member of a people who took advantage of the economic and political openness of America to prosper materially.
However, the good news is that many Jewish Americans are now seeing past their emotional attachment to the prejudices of the previous generations, such as Marxism, and are looking at America in a new, more objective light and have gained a greater appreciation for our founding principles. So while blacks continue to support the Rat party at rates in excess of 90%, the support for Rats among Jews generally declines with each generation.
Let him stay home and work on these in the city council, " how do we get better housing, better schools, clean air" are not fed problems, constitutionally speaking.
Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate the effort. Your explanation/argument holds water. The only part that bothers me is that I think Jews were held back by white Christian America. It wasn't just the clubs. It was the banking firms, the law firms, the schools and on and on. They had to band together and develop their own firms and clubs and schools. Their own damn economy and a whole lot of Jews got good at pretending to not be jewish. I think the tales of oppression and their identification with all that is at this point unreasonable and out of sync with reality, it's a tired old schtick at this point -- it's just soooo boring, but at the same time I think their was plenty of anti-semitism to go around. On the topic, a couple days ago I was reading a description of a near by private school (I live in the west coast capital of whacky liberalism) and apparently they didn't permit Jews or Blacks until 1957. A couple years before I was born. It dosn't make sense to me.
Yet in their minds, the history of oppression suffered in the old country was transformed into a mythology of oppression in the new country. While these Jews were perhaps the most successful immigrant class in American history, nevertheless the failure to be admitted to an exclusive country club or listed on a social register of high society was exaggerated into a form of persecution
You account is good but prior to WW2 Jews were kept out of certain sectors. Where they could practice medicine or law was restricted. There were few Jews on Wall Street. Jews were restricted from Ivy League Universities by unspoken quotas. Jews could not rise high in our major corporations. Some professions were very hard for Jews to break into. This was much more important than being kept out of certain clubs
in the minds and self-identity of this new generation of successful Jews -- continuing the tradition of being oppressed, as they were in the old country, and, unfair as the comparison is to white Christian Americans, nevertheless equating to some extent the white Christian Americans who welcomed them to this country and allowed them full economic and political participation, but yet were excluding them from their country clubs and social registers, with the white Christian Eastern Europeans who had in fact really persecuted their forebears.
You both have valid points. Jewish enclaves and black ghettos existed for totally different reasons with some of the same results and some totally different.
One out of every three Dem voters is either white or Hispanic. They are among the most loyal Dem voters yet the thin veneer of white liberals controlling the party has not allowed the minorities to have a greater voice in the party hierarchy. It will be interesting to watch what happens when the white liberals (and blacks) are pushed aside by the growing Hispanic minority.
"The black and Hispanic officials gathering today are discussing how to prevent David Yassky, a white city councilman from Brooklyn Heights, from winning a seat that once belonged to Shirley Chisholm, the first black woman elected to Congress."
The seat belongs to the people, not Shirley Chisholm or Major Owens, or for that matter, anyone who may hold the office representing that district. Score another mis-hit for the newspaper that prints all the news that sucks.
Boo hoo. The district is 58.5 percent black, 21.4 percent white and 12.1 percent Hispanic. Blacks and Hispanic represent about one-third of all Dem voters. Why should they have a white Jew represent their district? I have no problem with this and wonder why there isn't more of it. It is about time the minorities start demanding more of a say in who runs the Dem party.
Jews vote about 75% for the Dems because they are on the Left of the political spectrum. Who else are they going to vote for? The Communists?
When so-called “WASP” firms tended to hire their own rather than the newly-arrived Jews, Jews simply formed their own firms and businesses and made these into successes (in the classic American way).
Marcus Goldman started his business by walking down Wall Street offering to discount commercial paper and putting the collected bills in his hat. You may have heard of the firm he founded, Goldman Sachs, which is now considered the ultimate “white shoe” Wall Street firm. Same with Henry, Emanuel and Meyer Lehman (Lehman Brothers).
Jews formed their own law firms, which are now among the leading firms in the country. And in fact a number of the old line “WASP” law firms did hire Jews and make them partners, although this is not readily acknowledged by Jews. And Jews formed their own medical practices, which were quite successful.
Jews formed their own businesses, like Bloomingdale’s and countless others one could name, many of which became astonishingly successful.
So WASP firms didn’t simply hand over the keys to their businesses to the newly-arrived Jews? Boo-hoo. The fact of the matter is that Jews took full advantage of their constitutional entitlement to equality of political and economic opportunity in America to become very successful. And they suffered nothing that can be compared to the genuine persecution they endured in the old countries.
And these Jewish-founded firms and businesses often used their freedom to hire whomever they wanted to hire OTHER Jews, so these firms, at least in the early decades, were largely themselves made up nearly exclusively of Jews.
However, it continues to be an essential element of American Jewish identity to portray themselves as among the oppressed and downtrodden, a mythology of “victimhood” with a powerful continuing appeal.
Once again you are only half right.
Blacks, at least in inner cities, tend to believe the most wild conspiracy stories about everybody else including lots of stories about how the White Man is keeping everybody down. And many of those stories are replete with Zionist conspiracies about Jews controlling banking and financial markets and harming minorities and the poor. The close proximity of the neighorhoods which used to be Jewish in Brooklyn which are now mostly Black also play a big part. Hell, most ethnic groups in NY hate the living hell out of the other ethnic groups in neighboring areas but the black/Jewish hate seems to have a life of its own despite years and years of acts of infinite help and kindness to overcome it.
Ramin Talaie for The New York Times
City Councilman David Yassky, who is running against three black candidates in the 11th Congressional District in Brooklyn, campaigned Sunday at the Jesus Is Lord Ministry, in a community center in Flatbush.
The Rainbow Coalition isn't looking too happy.
In 2004, Kerry carried Brooklyn by about a 3-1 margin (not quite as lopsidedly as Gore in 2000, who had a 5-1 margin over Bush).
But Hispanics could be white or black or native american. Some blacks easily "pass." Why not look for the candidate who best could represent the needs of the congressional district regardless of his, her, or its pigmentation or accent? God forbid that the content of the character would be trumped by the color of the skin, or something like that, which was rightly said by a certain famous person during the "Civil Rights" movement.
There's a word for people who judge based on the color of a person's skin -- and that word is racist. These black and Hispanic officials are sick, bigoted, racist. Period.
I was hoping to see a letter to the editor about it. I should have sent one. Of course they get 2000 a day.
Anyway, Jews need not apply, or -- whites need not apply.
That's the sum of it. They talk about the legacy of slavery. How about the legacy of white guilt?
Againstallhope.
Actually, one more post here. I'm sure some of you who have posted on this are from the district? Are you? If so, is there any reaction to the article where you are?
Thanks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.