Friday, September 15, 2006

 

Keith Ellison And The Ground Game

Steve Gilliard links and comments on a FireDogLake piece about Joe Lieberman's complete lack of a ground game in Connecticut -- a lack that Lieberman may not even realize exists. That made me think of Keith Ellison's campaign, which is all about the ground game. As Britt Robson notes at City Pages.com, Ellison moved Heaven and Earth to get inner-city Minneapolitans to vote, and to vote for him. The importance of the ground game cannot be underestimated -- and yet the GOP/Media Complex (probably because it loves the billions of dollars campaign ads bring in) doesn't give it enough credit. Now, Keith Ellison, a black man and a Muslim (not a "Black Muslim" -- that is to say, not a member of Farrakhan's outfit) as well as a state legislator and community legal activist of several years' standing, was woefully underfunded compared to his centrist white opponents. Both Mike Erlandson (the heavy favorite of the conventional-wisdom junkies and the handpicked choice of retiring Congressman Martin Sabo, in whose office he worked) and Ember Reichgott Junge were able to constantly run radio and even broadcast TV ads, in addition to blanketing Minneapolis with lawn signs. But Ellison's Democratic foes were the least of his worries. The Republican blogosphere, especially Power Line and "Minnesota Democrats Exposed", were constantly hammering him from the moment he got the DFL endorsement in March, lobbing smear after smear in his direction. Thing is, you'd think that if they really thought he was such a weak candidate, they would have just shut up and let him coast to a primary victory (as he ultimately did last week), THEN brought out their smear weapons. But nooooo: The very idea of a black man becoming a Minnesota Congressman has apparently unhinged them to the point where their strategic senses have gone missing. Against all this, Ellison had these three things: 1) just enough money to do a few targeted radio ads and a handful of lawn signs, 2) the Democratic-Farmer-Labor endorsement (which used to be powerful, but has lost its luster in recent decades) and 3) one hell of a ground game. The guy with the ground game won. And he will be Congressman-Elect Keith Ellison come November. And as Robson also notes in the piece I linked to above, he's revived the value of the DFL endorsement, especially among the very lefties and progressives that should be the DFL's base, but which have been staying away from the DFL in droves as it tacked rightward in the last two decades.


Comments:
Keith Ellison: a black man and a Muslim (not a "Black Muslim" -- that is to say, not a member of Farrakhan's outfit)

David Duke: a white man and a nationalist (not a white supremecist---that is to say, not a member of the KKK)


From Wikipedia:

"Duke is a self-styled white nationalist, though critics often label him a white supremacist. He says he does not think of himself as a racist, stating that he is a "racial realist" and that he believes "all people have a basic human right to preserve their own heritage."

============================

Republicans respond to Duke:

In 1990, Duke challenged incumbent Democratic Senator Bennett Johnston in the open primary as a Republican and received 44 percent of the vote, including more than 60 percent of the white vote, according to exit polls.

Johnston was able to win re-election (and thus avoid a direct run-off with Duke) by receiving 53 percent of the vote.

Why??

The endorsed Republican party candidate, State Senator Ben Baggert of New Orleans, who had been supported by the Virginia Republican leader Oliver North, withdrew from the race two days before the vote.

Distressed national Republican officials had anticipated Baggert losing and fragmenting [Democrat] Johnston's support; so funding for Baggert's campaign was halted, and he dropped out though his name remained on the ballot.

Republican Senator John C. Danforth of Missouri openly endorsed Democrat Johnston.

Duke ran for Louisiana governor in 1991 as a Republican Party candidate, despite getting an official reproval (letter expressing the GOP's disdain for Duke's activities) from that party.


Democrats on Keith X Hakim Ellison:

"He reminds us of Wellstone!"

I have to admit that I thought Wellstone the politician was nuttier than a fruitcake, but I've got enough respect for him as a person to believe that he'd be really pissed off to read the crap his party is spewing in support of Keith X.

I've got to give it to the Democrats though...you've got that "diversity" thing all wrapped up: One anti-Semetic white supremecist (Robert Carlyle Byrd) and now one anti-Semetic black supremecist (Keith X Hakim Ellison).
 
Swiftee says, David Duke: a white man and a nationalist (not a white supremecist---that is to say, not a member of the KKK)

Unsurprisingly, as false as it is illiterate.

David Duke was a leader of the Ku Klux Klan, an organization that has committed racial murders, racially-oriented arsons, and other crimes on a massive scale. He continues to be a leader among white supremacists.

David Duke has neither renounced the Klan, nor the Republican Party. The former Republican governor of Louisiana bought membership lists from David Duke for about 10 times the going rate. He has graduated from wearing white sheets to wearing a swastika and an elephant pin.

Louis Farrakhan is the head of an anti-Semitic organization that has never been involved in racially-based crimes. And there's no connection watsoever between Louis Farrakhan and the politician this corrupt little Republican whore is attempting to smear.
Republican whore.
 
According to available documentation and first person declarations by his friends, Keith X Hakim Ellison was a member of the Nation of Islam, an organization whose membership has been convicted of indiscriminately sniping innocent civilians as well as assassination of it's own leaders.

Current NOI leader, Louis FaraKKKhan was quoted once as saying "It is an act of mercy to white people that we end your world... We must end your world and bring in a new world." He also said, "We are at war and we never stop fighting for justice. You must have force... don't drop your gun and don't forget to squeeze."

He continues to be a leader among black supremacists.

Keith X Hakim Ellison has carefully parsed his words, but has neither renounced FaraKKKhan, nor the Nation of Islam.

He has graduated from wearing silly bowties to wearing a CAIR pin and a smarmy grin.

Louis Farrakhan is the head of an anti-Semitic organization that has been involved in racially-based crimes. And there's plenty of connection between Louis Farrakhan and Keith X Hakim Ellison.

The contributor named "Charles" has been spinning this story so hard he's dizzy...and has had to resort to silly non sequiters and name-calling
 
Heh, BTW....the point was that of course Duke is just as much a racist as he ever was, and even though his back peddaling hasn't fooled anyone, evidently Keith X Hakim Ellison thought they were worth giving a try himself.

(To anyone with a modicum of intelligence, I appologize: I wouldn't normally have bothered to explain the blatently obvious, but I have to make concessions for Chuck & PW's stunted mental abilities.)
 
Wow swiftee, the fact that Minneapolis will be represented in Congress by an African-American Muslim really bugs you doesn't it? Oh, and it's called spell check. Look into it.
 
Funny thing: Ellison has specifically denounced Farrakhan and his organization. He's been endorsed by local Jewish organizations in Minneapolis. I don't think that's gonna happen unless he's being sincere.

In contrast, not only has Duke never denounced the Klan, he continues to front a nakedly racist and anti-Semitic organization, and continues to push that ideology.

They're not even close to comparable.
 
David Duke and Louis Farrakhan might be comparable to a person who is himself a white supremacist, David.

Now, Swiftee is so completely clueless that it's hard to tell. For example, in the latest is using an incredible stretch, that one member of the Nation of Islam committed a crime, to brand the Nation of Islam is a criminal organization. He uses the crackpot AIM-- people who are still pushing Vince Foster's suicide as a murder-- as the reference for this conspiracy theory. I imagine that we could find one Don Irvine associate who has committed a crime to brand AIM a criminal organization, if our goal was simply to smear them.

But I am interested by the fact that he thinks that David Duke is not a white supremacist. He has been taken by the hand and shown that he was wrong. The fact that the Klan has committed thousands of murders and other crimes does not touch him. He still pretends that there's an equivalence between Farrakhan and David Duke.

If he's not actually a white supremacist, he has such extreme double standards that he ought to be.
 
Farrakhan may not be quite in Duke's class as a progenitor of violence, but he is a raging anti-Semite and a first-class hatemonger. He's good at disguising it, though, and particularly good at playing the victim card as a means of roping in other blacks. Which is why so many people, like Ellison, were suckered into supporting the Million Man March.

The big difference, of course, is that Duke represents a long tradition of white supremacism, with all the violence associated with it. Nation of Islam, in contrast, has been largely peaceful over the course of its relatively short history, though not always so.
 
There's one other thing about Swiftee's comments that I found particularly telling. See if you can spot it, Charles and David, in this following passage of his:

David Duke: a white man and a nationalist (not a white supremecist---that is to say, not a member of the KKK)

From Wikipedia:

"Duke is a self-styled white nationalist, though critics often label him a white supremacist. He says he does not think of himself as a racist, stating that he is a "racial realist" and that he believes "all people have a basic human right to preserve their own heritage."


Swiftee apparently takes Duke's self-description as a "nationalist" at face value -- and, unlike with Keith Ellison, he is obviously willing to give David Duke every benefit of every doubt.

Now, does anyone here remember which American political movement likes to use the word "nationalist" to disguise its race hatred? (Hint: Their website is http://www.nationalist.org.)
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
Swiftee calling anyone else an idiot is like Hitler accusing Churchill of war crimes.

But carry on, Swiftee. You're the worst advertisement imaginable for the Republican party. If you had any sense, you'd have stopped after the fifth or sixth time you had your smears debunked and handed back to you on a silver platter. But you still keep coming back here, still keep doing damage to the Republican Party.

Carry on! I wouldn't dream of stopping you.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
I asked you first, Swiftee. I'm so courteous, I'll let you answer first.

But I do find it interesting that I'm asking you whether you're a white supremacist based on your obsessive attacks on Keith Ellison and your denial that David Duke is a "white supremecist" (sic). I don't see any reason why you would ask me about a crime of sexual assault unless you felt that you'd gotten f---ked.

You haven't, you know. You've just been forced to face the truth. For an individual like yourself, I can see why that might feel like rape.

I'd like to point out that you are, in my lay opinion, approaching libel. A pen name, like Charles Utwater II, is not the same as an anonymous screen name. It's a name I use to write under, and therefore has potential economic value, like a brand name. Libel is a real crime, with potential real consequences. In accord with Terms of Service, Mercury Rising, not tolerate criminal activity. I rather think Blogger does not either.

I usually give people three warnings before banning them from the forum. You've just used up two. I recommend that you delete the post, although I've saved a copy to disk.
 
A Terms of Service Violation has been filed against Mr. Swift with Blogger.

Mr. Swift chose to make a libelous post, repeated the libel in a separate thread, and refused to remove the libelous post.

He is persona non grata on Mercury Rising. Any further posts by him will be treated as harassment, which is also a violation of Terms of Service.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

More blogs about politics.
Technorati Blog Finder