Posted on 05/24/2002 1:31:15 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Last month, an intriguing little congressional pow-wow was clandestinely held – no press invited – in the Northern Virginia town of Leesburg. It was a 3-day conference, and attendance appears to have been restricted by ethnicity and race.
But this was not a gathering of the Leesburg chapter of the White Citizens Council. It was a conclave of three congressional caucuses – the Black Caucus, the Hispanic Caucus and the Asia Pacific Caucus. And the invitation list appears to have been made up with one provision in mind: No whites need apply.
As described in a front-page story in the New York Times, the goal of this "tri-caucus retreat" was to "create an atmosphere of understanding among groups that have often felt pitted against one another for resources and recognition." But as the caucuses claim to represent only Americans of African, Asian and Hispanic descent, just what were they uniting for, and who are they uniting against?
Now since the Democratic Party has been fairly described as a "collection of warring tribes that has come together in anticipation of common plunder," and all attendees were Democrats, there was lots of talk of a joint looting expedition at the expense of taxpayers.
Attendees pointed to their common front on the $175 billion farm bill, where the Black Caucus demanded an expansion of the food-stamp program, and the Hispanic Caucus demanded restoration of food stamps for immigrants. Apparently, they had jointly triumphed.
Another "shining example" of collusion was in Texas, where Hispanics and blacks joined forces to nominate Tony Sanchez for governor and African-American Ron Kirk for Senate. Capturing the seats lately held by George W. Bush and Phil Gramm for a Hispanic and an African American would apparently be real progress.
But all this raises a question: If it is acceptable for blacks and Hispanics to collude to seize power from white Americans, why is it a violation of civil rights for whites to collude to increase their representation in legislatures at the expense of minorities? If the latter is racism, why is the former progress?
The closer one reads Lynette Clemetson's Times' story, the more it appears this Leesburg summit was not about the politics of aiding the poor and powerless against the rich and powerful. This secret summit was about how folks of Third World ancestry can join forces to seize power and resources from white America.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction is a law of Newtonian physics. The same is true in politics. If it has become acceptable for caucuses that represent people of color to join against America's white majority, look for white folks to begin to identify themselves by race, rather than party or philosophy, to preserve what they have. Has the New York Times considered the consequences of what its reporter seems to be celebrating?
All, however, was not harmony at Leesburg. Seems that last January, Latino businessman broke away from the National Minority Auto Dealers Association to form the National Hispanic Auto Dealers Association. Reported without comment. Can one imagine the Times' reaction to a Euro-American Auto Dealers Association?
As Clemetson's story runs on, the Spirit of Leesburg began to reveal itself in the entertainment: "Audience members sat rapt as Sarah Jones, a socially conscious writer and actress ... slipped in and out of accents to portray characters from a Mexican-American labor organizer to a new immigrant from Haiti who scolded listeners: 'God bless America, but not because of you. Remember, your ancestors came here, too.'"
Would it be impertinent to ask who "you" is? And if this us-vs.-them racial rhetoric is acceptable at a Third World caucus-coalition, why is it a hate crime for white folks? Nor was this the end of the fun. Writes Clemetson: "Beau Sea, a Chinese-American slam poet from Oklahoma, raised eyebrows with his confrontational number, 'The Asians are coming'":
We are everywhere
We are programming your Websites
Making your executives look smart
And getting into your schools – for free
And you know what?
It's only gonna get bigger.
Middle America: Hello! From what went down at Leesburg, it is clear the old idea of integration and assimilation, of one nation and one people, is giving way among elites of color to a racial and ethnic spoils system. And as "Anglos" are a minority in California already and soon to be a minority in Texas, perhaps they should start asking what kind of country it is going to be when they are outnumbered nationwide by mid-century.
It's fair for Buchanan to express his reservations about this new caucus without being slammed as a racist.
You are correct to put into check the abuse of the term "Third World." Who falls into that category changes all the time.
That would apply to you?
Years of brainwashing have done their job. Many, many people have gotten soft in their thinking. They are the sheep.
That would apply to you?
No.
At least the bunch at this meeting do.
The bunch at the meeting are politicians looking for wedge issues. It's what they do for a living.
Of course, we all know these Hispanics are going to vote Republican, don't we? If you buy this line being put out by the President and the Republicans, I have a bridge---------
You mean those people? Them that will never vote republican and never support my values?...sorry, I don't buy it. BTW I'm not a GWB supporter, he's too liberal. I do support conservative causes and I don't care where the ancestors of my allies come from. If 10 black people out of a hundred support conservatism, I'll take 'em. I wouldn't expect to get that support focusing on the skin color of my opponents. If I say "blacks" are my enemy instead of "liberals" are my enemy, then I've just caused every black person to go to my opponents camp. This is why the liberals are pushing this tactic. I for one am not going to help them.
No hispanic liberal politcians are grouping themselves with Black and Asian liberal politcians. It is Pat who extrapolate from these particular politcians to take a broad swipe at people at large.
This secret summit was about how folks of Third World ancestry can join forces to seize power and resources from white America
and
And as "Anglos" are a minority in California already and soon to be a minority in Texas, perhaps they should start asking what kind of country it is going to be when they are outnumbered nationwide by mid-century.
As I said before, among these groups, hispanics identify themselves as "white". The liberals don't like this, are trying to change this and they're being helped by "conservatives" who spout rhetoric like this. (let's face it, if hispanics are white they won't be a minority for very long because they'll be like the Irish, Italians, etc)
No doubt this is a succesful liberal tactic used over and over. How do you feel when someone denigrats conservatives as racist, sexist , homophobes, etc.? Do you feel included? When someone denigrates white people as these groups of politicians are trying to do, I don't think the most effective response is to assume that "every" hispanic thinks the same. In any battle it takes two to tango. By refusing to engage in my group versus that group I diminish their troup strength. If I'm an advocate of individualism, individualism has to be the principle from which my arguements flow.
Or a person of "african, asian, or hispanic" origin who's afraid of losing a free meal ticket.
Oh my God! Someone said something you don't like against Israel? Well jezzz, He must be as crazy and jew hating as these religious fanatics and mad bombers. He must be a nazi and a member of the KKK. Oh my, Buchanan sucks, he said something biased against Israel. That no good baby killing nazi!
Now, when Pat makes the comment about our ancestors being from Third World countries, what was his point and what did that add to the article or what he was trying to say?
lots of people who feel that american power should be used to defend israel are labeled as being anti-jewish or nazis if they merely feel that all is not right about the way that the israelis have treated the palestinians. It is not that these people are anti-jewish, it is that their accusers are very bigoted.
I even thought, perhaps mistakenly, that Pat buchanan would want american power to be used against those who might try to squash israel. and I've been listening to the same pat as you! you see him as anti-jewish, i see you as either anti-catholic or anti-christian for your views against him.
It will be a Third World country.
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.