Posted on 08/30/2006 1:04:31 AM PDT by neverdem
Brooklyn’s 11th Congressional District has had black representation since a court-ordered reapportionment in the 1960’s. Shirley Chisholm represented the area when she became the first black woman ever elected to Congress. So it was not surprising that black leaders reacted with some pain when a white city councilman, David Yassky, announced he was moving a few blocks to establish a home in the district and run for the seat.
Mr. Yassky is pitted against three black candidates in a Democratic primary that is the equivalent of election in their highly Democratic district. While we agree that having good minority representation in Congress is critical to a healthy democracy, the political organization of Brooklyn has miserably failed the goals of the voting rights law by treating the district as a fiefdom. Instead of leadership, the machine has cranked out corruption.
The incumbent, Representative Major Owens, is retiring and wants to hand the seat to his son, Chris, a former health-care administrator and community organizer. The idea of handing political office down the family tree like an antique watch has become something of a tradition in Brooklyn, and not a good one. The younger Mr. Owens is extremely well-educated and likable, but he seems to have neither the political base nor the passion to become the kind of congressman the district needs.
Carl Andrews, a state senator, owes his job and lucrative patronage work to Clarence Norman, the former...
--snip--
Representative Owens also set a mean tone early on, calling Mr. Yassky a “colonizer.”
Mr. Yassky is undoubtedly an opportunist, as are most politicians and certainly all those in this race. But far more important is his stellar record on the Council, leading groundbreaking work on gun control, affordable housing, the environment and jobs creation — all important to the 11th District.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
(sigh) Owens is a turd. Has been since he got into Congress, and how dare this Jew take a seat that rightfully belongs to his heir!
White people can represent black people, and black people can represent white people. Why is that so wrong?
Political diversity is lacking in this part of Brooklyn, NYC.
A small but nice thing. This is just another reminder to Blacks that the rat really doesn't give two shiites about this. He cares only for what he can take from the Blacks and never cares about treating Blacks fairly. owens would not be the first pol to "give" a son or daughter a seat. We do it too. Big deal! What IS news is that the rat in Brooklyn is so sure about the Black vote that he's willing to pull crap like this.
I wonder why the NYT doesn't condemn the Black and Hispanic caucuses. Race does matter in election politics. Districts are gerrymandered to reflect racial living patterns.
It's not :)
But tell the second part...
and black people can represent white people
...to the Dems.
"White people can represent black people, and black people can represent white people. Why is that so wrong?"
It's wrong because a liberal court said it was. Your statement is correct. But according to the courts, a white running in a black district is a racist, while black corruption in the same district run by a black is called business as usual.
I hope Yassky wins. Because he is the best candidate for the job. Ten again, he is a lib so the corruption will go on. The money will just be distributed elsewhere.
And what's hilarious is that by following the VRA and packing these districts with minorities, it dilutes the Dem vote in surrounding districts, and allows the Republicans to obtain more seats.
What's the opposite of cutting off your nose to spite your face? Because that's what the CBC and Hispanic caucuses do best.
They could care less about what happens outside their district. They want their little fiefdoms and rely on the hatemongers like Jackson and Sharpton to bring in the dollars.
A few weeks ago I spotted Major Owens campaigning for his son and got into a discussion with him about the war on terror. His take was that it should be handled as a "criminal matter."
Alas, none of these candidates is any good. Yassky's big issue is gun control! But I plan to vote for whomever has the best chance of beating Chris Owens.
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.