You might want to check out his links with CAIR and the Nation of Islam before you get too reflect-y there, even aside from his dubious record as a state legislator.
(Me, I don't much care which invisible friends my Congresspeople talk to in their spare time, unless it affects their legislating, but I do like to concern myself with their tangible associations.)
Yes, well, my point is that that's as maybe, but choosing to celebrate this fact when the Congressman in question has spent some considerable time working with the Nation of Islam - that would be Louis Farrakhan's mob, the ones who are basically the polar equivalents of the KKK - and other dubious groups, using that to celebrate as you say above is about as tin-eared as celebrating the election of an ex-Nazi to Congress in 1950 because it shows that we've got over our silly prejudice against Germans.
There's a reason why he lost over 20% of the previous Democratic vote in a previously safe seat, in an election in which the Democrats have generally gained, and it's intrinsically and inescapably tied to the point you're trying to make.
Imagine if your hypothetical ex-Nazi's 1950 campaign had been endorsed and supported by major national and local Jewish groups -- even over a Jewish opponent. *That's* how tangled the story of the 2006 MN-5th campaign was.
I very deliberately stayed the living hell out of that mess. I rather deliberately didn't insert my opinion about what my choices, if I were a primary or general election voter in MN-5, would have been. If you want to argue that Mr. Ellison wouldn't be your first choice to be the first Muslim elected to Congress, you're free to. But your (and for that matter, my) opinion doesn't change the fact that he is. And that by itself is an important milestone, especially in a country where powerful political forces continue to work torwards making the law of the Old Testament the law of America.
Maybe it would have been more, for lack of better words, convenient for me if the first Muslim elected to Congress was someone that didn't make you uncomfortable. But it is as it was.
It doesn't make me particularly uncomfortable. The weasel - for values of weasel that are equal to one of the only six judges ever impeached by Congress in the history of the Republic - that you're putting in charge of the House Intelligence committee bothers me rather more.
However, it might - or at least it ought to, something of which I will be taking note - bother the Muslim community somewhat that they've got such a historical representative.
As for the 5th district, I think it is perhaps all too telling that in a safe Democratic seat, in an election in which the Democrats were generally gaining voter share, Mr. Ellison managed to lose 20% of the total vote over the previous Democratic incumbent, which requires some serious haemorrhaging of his co-partisans.
(And, frankly, inasmuch as this important milestone might reflect the victory of special pleading over meritocracy...)
Yeah, I don't know WTF, over, re: Alcee Hastings, esp. in light of the way William Jefferson was stripped (justifiably, IMO) of his Ways and Means committee assignments and the Democratic party and liberal netroots have targeted him for elimination, both in the original election and in the runoff that lies ahead. Granted, Pelosi hasn't actually formally appointed anyone yet, and so I think it ought to be interesting how the liberal NetRoots chooses to act with regards to influencing that decision.
(If I wanted to make a political point, I would have just gone with that old entry from the raswr-j quote-book, and said "Sometimes it's possible to be so open-minded that your brains fall out.", which based on current evidence even outside this case, seems to be the case in a lot of Minnesota these days. Remember the airport taxi brouhaha? But I wasn't bothering with that one.)
(Me, I don't much care which invisible friends my Congresspeople talk to in their spare time, unless it affects their legislating, but I do like to concern myself with their tangible associations.)
Reply
Reply
There's a reason why he lost over 20% of the previous Democratic vote in a previously safe seat, in an election in which the Democrats have generally gained, and it's intrinsically and inescapably tied to the point you're trying to make.
Reply
I very deliberately stayed the living hell out of that mess. I rather deliberately didn't insert my opinion about what my choices, if I were a primary or general election voter in MN-5, would have been. If you want to argue that Mr. Ellison wouldn't be your first choice to be the first Muslim elected to Congress, you're free to. But your (and for that matter, my) opinion doesn't change the fact that he is. And that by itself is an important milestone, especially in a country where powerful political forces continue to work torwards making the law of the Old Testament the law of America.
Maybe it would have been more, for lack of better words, convenient for me if the first Muslim elected to Congress was someone that didn't make you uncomfortable. But it is as it was.
Reply
However, it might - or at least it ought to, something of which I will be taking note - bother the Muslim community somewhat that they've got such a historical representative.
As for the 5th district, I think it is perhaps all too telling that in a safe Democratic seat, in an election in which the Democrats were generally gaining voter share, Mr. Ellison managed to lose 20% of the total vote over the previous Democratic incumbent, which requires some serious haemorrhaging of his co-partisans.
(And, frankly, inasmuch as this important milestone might reflect the victory of special pleading over meritocracy...)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment