The "no-whites-need-apply" caucus: Pat Buchanan asks, 'Who are they uniting against?'

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, May 24, 2002 | Pat Buchanan

[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.

---

[thathamiltonwoman]

Pat is right about a lot of things but he sounds hysterical here. A bunch of minorities got together and had dinner. Oh horrors!

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

Tell me this, then. Why did Pat add this to his article? It appears to be totally out of joint with the rest of what he was attempting to say.

I probably agree. The main message is - racism or race-based segregation is wrong, no matter who is practicing it.

The secondary message would be that these race caucuses and strategy sessions may have more to do with undermining our country culturally, by promoting a way of life and a form of government typical to today's 3d world. By identifying ideas such as 'individualism', 'liberty' and even 'capitalism' with the white race those who hate white Americans my want to undermine them by attacking 'white ideas' and ideals and replacing them with 3d World concepts such as 'group rights'.

[sneakypete]

With a name like "sneaky"pete, I guess I shouldn't have expected any better.

You are apparantely as ignorant about the non-support army as you are religion,and I am not responsible for your ignorance.

[sneakypete]

Why does WCC come to mind when I read such things?

I don't know. It's your mind,not mine. I don't even know what WCC is.

[rdb3]

The main message is - racism or race-based segregation is wrong, no matter who is practicing it.

Amen to that. But still, what Pat wrote here doesn't flow with the rest of his article. Remember writing assignments (high school of college) where you were penalized for having something inserted into your paper that had nothing to do with the topic of the paper? This is what Pat's guilty of.

I have tried to read it from different angles, yet I can not help but come to the conclusion that his "Third-World ancestry" statement was meant as an insult. It had to be, otherwise it would not have been placed within his article (especially since it has nothing to do with its topic).

Open mouth, insert foot. I agree that this clandestine meeting deserves to be called out, but I take him to task for that needless comment. And he could keep the obligatory "I didn't mean it that way" statement. I subscribe to the philosophy that people say what they mean and mean what they say.

[mac_truck]

..these race caucuses and strategy sessions may have more to do with undermining our country culturally, by promoting a way of life and a form of government typical to today's 3d world.

"The coalition is already testing its collective bargaining power. One recent success involved the farm bill President Bush signed this week . The black and Hispanic caucuses united on the nutrition section, or title, of the bill to get expanded food stamp subsidies, which the black members wanted, and to get the right to food stamps restored for legal immigrants, a priority for Hispanic members." (excerpt from NYT article)

Minority groups organizing to get a bigger piece of the government cheese is undermining our country...lol!

[mac_truck]

Buchanan was simply relaying a story of who, what when and what they said. - Period

Yeah, and I have a bridge...

[mac_truck]

Why Asians are in this picture is anyone's guess.

One word. Immigration.

[William Terrell]

I said I would gladly join a fight against *any* group of hyphenated Americans, because I think the concept is un-American and only forments discord and hard feelings. You should not appeal to me or anyone based on race, but on the fact we are Americans, and these groups are acting contrary to the American Way.

So, you condem this caucus of "ethnic groups" and their desire to form a political alliance against the founding people of the nation? Good.

From your post, I figure you may have misinterpreted my statement, "Now specifically who is formenting a "race war" here?". I was talking about this bevy of "ethnic groups", not you.

When I hear somebody cheer on an attack, or movement toward attack, political or military, on me, I want to know where his interest is sourced. That gives me some indication of the direction of his bias.

[jeremiah]

Thank you for the reply, I will get and read this.

[bok]

So, you condem this caucus of "ethnic groups" and their desire to form a political alliance against the founding people of the nation? Good. From your post, I figure you may have misinterpreted my statement, "Now specifically who is formenting a "race war" here?". I was talking about this bevy of "ethnic groups", not you. When I hear somebody cheer on an attack, or movement toward attack, political or military, on me, I want to know where his interest is sourced. That gives me some indication of the direction of his bias.

Memorial Day race riot breaks out between Hispanics and Blacks Foreshadowing of a rivalry to come in this new demographics shift?