Congressional Black Caucus vows to remain racially segregated
posted at 10:16 am on January 23, 2007 by Allahpundit
The fondest dreams of identity politics come magically true as a Caucus formed in 1969 by black representatives to address racism, disenfranchisement, and other “legislative concerns of black and minority citizens” refuses to admit the newly elected congressman from a district where blacks comprise a near-supermajority on account of his race, thereby disenfranchising his constituents.
It’s their own fault, I guess. If they’d elected a black Democrat like they were supposed to, this never would have happened.
Cohen said he became convinced that joining the caucus would be “a social faux pas” after seeing news reports that former Rep. William Lacy Clay Sr., D-Mo., a co-founder of the caucus, had circulated a memo telling members it was “critical” that the group remain “exclusively African-American.”…
“Mr. Cohen asked for admission, and he got his answer. … It’s time to move on,” the younger Clay said. “It’s an unwritten rule. It’s understood. It’s clear.”…
Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., who is white, tried in 1975 when he was a sophomore representative and the group was only 6 years old.
“Half my Democratic constituents were African-American. I felt we had interests in common as far as helping people in poverty,” Stark said. “They had a vote, and I lost. They said the issue was that I was white, and they felt it was important that the group be limited to African-Americans.”…
Cohen won his seat in the 60 percent black district as the only white candidate in a crowded primary field. If he faces a primary challenge next year from a black candidate, as expected, some Black Caucus members may work to defeat him.
Say, I wonder what America’s savior and the new head of the DLC think about this.
Update: The Think: “It’s not often that you’ll see me saying the following words, but I’ve got to say folks, my black racism radar just went way off the charts.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
He should have his ass kicked for even asking for admission to that POS anti-American clique.
DoctorDentons on January 23, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Pfft . Racists.
Theworldisnotenough on January 23, 2007 at 10:22 AM
They only do that to maintain diversity.
rightside on January 23, 2007 at 10:23 AM
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
TugboatPhil on January 23, 2007 at 10:24 AM
As an black American myself it really makes me angry to hear how segregated we insist on keeping ourselves. It only shows how racist that many of us still are towards whites or any other race that we perceive to be keeping us down. In my honest opinion the sooner we can get over this irrational mindset the better, by continuing this nonsense we’re only teaching our children to follow the same ignorant path.
Pestilence on January 23, 2007 at 10:27 AM
I thought the “good looking” Bill Clinton was our First Black President???….
What did I miss?
seejanemom on January 23, 2007 at 10:28 AM
And people wonder why I say that racism among minorities towards the majority is not only accepted, but … encouraged even by the msm.
One Angry Christian on January 23, 2007 at 10:33 AM
On PBS last night was a piece about the Supreme Court. Julian Bond was their ‘expert’ on the ‘black’ seat on the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas. Mr. Bond flatly stated that ALL blacks think alike except Justice Thomas. He made the point that Justice Thomas had inherited the ‘Black’ Supreme Court seat of Justice Marshall and had undone all of Marshall’s good work.
Apartheid is alive and kicking.
Limerick on January 23, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Black caucus and Miss Black America, Is this what Martin Luther King fought for?
infidel on January 23, 2007 at 10:41 AM
Think this is “March of Dimes” syndrome.
honora on January 23, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Ask Ludacris, William Jefferson and Jesse Jackson
Defector01 on January 23, 2007 at 10:43 AM
I tend to agree with you although I think that this sentiment has to come completely from within the black community and the less that “whites” make a big deal about it, the sooner it will come about.
Bill Cosby, hardly a social conservative, got roasted for his specific comments about behavior of some black youth. When most whites will be quiet and trust that there are more people in the black community who want to make positive changes, I think that will help bring about some of the change in mindset you mention.
Just my opinion after reading your post.
Bradky on January 23, 2007 at 10:50 AM
There are at least two different definitions of ‘black’. One is based on skin color; the other on ideology. I sometimes wonder what it must be like to have a cabal of ‘leaders’ who get to ‘speak for’ an ethnic group. The idea that a person of a certain ethnic background, gender, sexual orientation, or di
sfferently-abled status is assigned beliefs based on the appropriate Defining Official Minority Status Characteristic doesn’t make sense to me.There are no ‘white’, ‘heterosexual’, ‘anglophone’, ‘male’, ‘sighted’, ‘hearing’, ‘ambulatory’, ‘near-sighted’, ‘tall’, or any other characteristic ‘leaders’ telling me what I’m supposed to think as a person with those attributes. To suggest that members of these minority groups need ‘leaders’ to do their thinking for them is insulting.
The Monster on January 23, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Racists. Once the Hispanic population is the majority can we have a White Caucus and exclude all other races? If so, why not now? If not now, when? If not when, how?
Griz on January 23, 2007 at 10:54 AM
yes
DwnSouthJukin on January 23, 2007 at 10:54 AM
I had to look this one up – good description. Learn something new everyday.
Thanks
Bradky on January 23, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Stephen I. Cohen? Maybe you need to get out the Jew signal again.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 23, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Isn’t there a Black Oscars too?
CrimsonFisted on January 23, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Quiet ya’ll.
Limerick on January 23, 2007 at 11:08 AM
“That fountain labeled ‘Colored Only’ is ours, and we better not catch any of you crackers trying to drink from it!”
frankj on January 23, 2007 at 11:08 AM
When I read this article this morning I was dumbfounded. This caucus was founded to supposedly fight for those who are discriminated against not to discriminate themselves and keep racism alive. I’m sure the MSM will not even mention this today (even if there were no SOTU speach) and the only place you will even hear about it would possibly be FoxNews. Had the roles been reversed, watch out!!! Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be in front of every camera and microphone they could find. Since they are for those that are oppressed and discriminated against, why are they not rushing to Rep. Cohens defense…..oh yeah, thats right, he is the wrong color even though he is trying to help out the thousands of black constituants in his district. That is messed up.
fightingirish24 on January 23, 2007 at 11:10 AM
Allah the most beneficient, you apparently didn’t RTFA.
Harold Ford is on the record as opposing primary challenges, and is quoted in the freaking article saying that. The CBC successfully deposed a sitting Texas congressman when the boundaires of his seat changed and the CBC figured that they could get a Black Democratic congressman, rather than just a Democratic one.
The CBC is a holding pen for aged, Marxist radicals. Nearly all represent massively D districts, thanks to USSC approved gerrymandering and the bloc voting behaviors of the black population. So the only competition is the primary, much easier for a radical to squeak through. Now Barack fits in with them (look at his resume… he’s very out there, but better than HRC at keeping the mask on) but Harold Ford doesn’t. Harold’s relatives do, and that will be his perpetual handicap, as far too many Ford’s have had their hands caught in the cookie jar.
libertarianuberalles on January 23, 2007 at 11:20 AM
The same thing happened at my high school. We had a club called H.A.B.L.A., which was basically an after school club about hispanic culture.
There was one girl who had been a member for a year or two and went to rejoin the next year only to learn that they wouldn’t allow her to join since she was white.
Did everyone forget the “United” portion of our country’s name?
But really, I think even white people are responsible for this. We’ve demonized the actions of our ancestors so much that we’re almost like Germany gets when speaking of the Holocaust. Yes, we have a horrible, tragic history, but if we can’t move past that and concentrate on the world as it is today, we’ll never progress as people.
Esthier on January 23, 2007 at 11:25 AM
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
csdeven on January 23, 2007 at 11:26 AM
Cohen won this seat in Memphis that Harold Ford, Jr. vacated in his pursuit of a Senate seat. Harold’s brother, Jake, ran against Cohen in the Dem primary, lost, and then got in the race as an Independent, a la Lieberman. However, Harold never endorsed the rightful Dem nominee (Cohen). The greatest ’06 Elecetion story never told (outside Memphis).
So, Cohen wins, tries to accede to the wishes of his consituents (represent us!), and is shot down. Nothing illustrates the fallacy of identity politics better.
Cuffy Meigs on January 23, 2007 at 11:26 AM
Great point honora.
csdeven on January 23, 2007 at 11:29 AM
As racist as the KKK.
Labamigo on January 23, 2007 at 11:37 AM
I wonder if someone from the press will have the nerve to ask the CBC how a political group can exclude someone on purely racial grounds and not be considered racist.
morganfrost on January 23, 2007 at 11:40 AM
Does anyone realize that the Southern whites in 1871 was more diverse than contemporary blacks?
Tim Burton on January 23, 2007 at 11:40 AM
Let me be clear, Cohen is ultra-liberal. His attempt to join the Black Caucus was not the stunt of a white, southern moderate Dem trying to tweak the nose of his party to gin up conservative support. Not by a long shot.
Cohen truly wanted to join the CDC so he could deliver results to his constituents (black inner city Memphis, not the white ‘burbs) and maintain his seat. Otherwise, he is outta there in 2008 because he was ineffectual. And Jake Ford gets the seat, joins the caucus, and balance is restored to the force. Disgusting.
Cuffy Meigs on January 23, 2007 at 11:42 AM
What does the Congressional White Caucus say about this?
BacaDog on January 23, 2007 at 11:47 AM
What happen to being just, human?
Kini on January 23, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Diversity through segregation!
The guy sounded lie a wimp if you ask me. I would have continued to call them out. It’s not about THEM. It’s about HIS voters.
SouthernGent on January 23, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Probably considering what to do with Cohen – betrayal is a punishable offense.
Rick on January 23, 2007 at 12:29 PM
- not exactly MLK’s words, but hey, close enough for Government work.
gekkobear on January 23, 2007 at 1:17 PM
The Congressional Jewish Caucus is strangely silent about all this…
PaisleyCow on January 23, 2007 at 1:24 PM
As is the Congressional Vulcan Caucus. I haven’t heard anything from Wu recently.
PaisleyCow on January 23, 2007 at 1:25 PM
I’m blogging about this when I get home from work tonight.
The CBC *is* a racist organization. Let there be no doubt about that. MLK would weep over how backwards and twisted his message had become. And while I give Cohen props for trying to do right by his constituents, I would gently remind him that the actually purpose of the CBC is NOT about helping poor black folk, but keeping priviledged liberal black folk in positions of power in the Congress.
This whole thing deserves amplified national attention, and a sharp, unflincing spotlight needs to be be brought to bear on the CBC and their antics. Too bad the Legacy Media won’t be a part of that equation.
itzWicks on January 23, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Didn’t the CBC attempt to exclude Gary Franks, though black, because he was a republican?
http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7126
In the 1990s Republican Congressman J.C. Watts of Oklahoma refused CBC membership and described unnamed black Democratic leaders as “race-hustling poverty pimps.” He was elevated to the third highest position in the Republican congressional leadership but chose not to seek reelection in 2002. Another Republican, Rep. Gary Franks elected from Connecticut in 1990, accepted membership in the CBC but soon found that, despite paying $5,000 in dues, he was never informed of some of its meetings and was locked out of others by Democrats who wanted to keep what they discussed in those meetings secret from Republicans. In 1993, after Franks threatened to quit the Caucus, then-chairman Kweisi Mfume of Maryland persuaded him to stay by agreeing to a deal. Chairman Mfume’s deal was that the “Democratic Caucus” of the CBC — i.e., every member except Republican Franks — would continue to exclude him from their private meetings where they voted to set policies. But these policies, Mfume promised, would then be discussed and voted on again by the full CBC, where Franks was a minority of one.
eagles5 on January 23, 2007 at 1:32 PM
The CBC is what we’ve always known it to be. It has nothing to do with the black community and nothing to do with solving problems. It exists to ensure those in the caucus exist and maintain power. They do this by creating as many dependents and victims as they can. In Larry Elder’s words, they are victicrats and poverty-pimps. It has little to do with race and everything to do with liberalism…..as the CBC bows before the altar of liberalism…..
ritethinker on January 23, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Most liberal causes are this. The global warming is exactly this. The same people complaining of the “coming ice age” are now backing the “global warming” (Stephen Schneider and Crispin Tickell are two that come to mind).
Racism is dying in America, panic is beginning to set in. An industry is grinding to a halt, but the black caucus will hang on.
right2bright on January 23, 2007 at 1:41 PM
From the CBC website:
Did they invite Mel Martinez to join?
As long as you’re black.
Check out the site, especially the “priorities” tab where their grievences with “white America” are listed.
Charlie Rangel is a founding member. That pretty much says it all.
BacaDog on January 23, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Oops, forgot the link.
BacaDog on January 23, 2007 at 1:45 PM
My. How very racist of them.
It’s a pity that there are people of all colors that haven’t taken Dr. King’s words to heart and use the division of race to advance their own personal political agendas at the expense of all americans.
Jones Zemkophill on January 23, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Well, I guess he’ll just have to join the Congressional White Caucus instead…
mojo on January 23, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Nah, the real reason is that he looks too much like the Cryptkeeper.
Phil Smith on January 23, 2007 at 4:43 PM
Dr. Martin Luther King was a Republican for a very good reason.
Democrats are the party of racism, bigotry, poverty, segregation, exploitation, immorality, hypocrisy, and arrogance.
They are running a “Woman” president as if there was never a woman presidential candidate before.
They are running a “black” candidate as if there were never a black candidate before.
Alan Keyes was all but ignored (conservative-Libertarian) while Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, and even Shirley Chisolm were praised and received a great deal of media coverage, when they ran for president.
Now a man who is not black, but is the offspring of a Caucasian woman and an African man is labeled “black” and we are watching a “flavor of the month” exhibition.
The new flavor? “What are we going to have? A black man, or a woman, as president? Gee, maybe we’ll have a Hispanic. That will really help make things different! Let’s have either a Hispanic, a black, or a female president.”
This is a popularity contest, not a presidential contest.
Who is going to fight the Islamic Jihadi Caliphate Wars?
Who will get the last vestiges of Western Civilization, Europe, and parts of South America, off their duffs and standing up for their once great culture against the overwhelming spread of Islamism and Sharia?
Who will reduce taxes, spend less taxpayer money, protect the lives of the innocent, fight against racial preferences, fight against special preferences for special groups – an unconstitutional violation of the equal rights under the law guidelines?
Those are just a few questions I have to ask.
I don’t expect the news media or Hollywood to ask those questions, or to even be concerned about them. I don’t expect Republicans to do so either, for they have shown themselves to be weak, feeble people who won’t stand up for their principles, or honor the values and principles that their voters elected them to uphold.
Halle Berry was raised by her white mother after her father left her as a small child. Nevertheless, Halle Berry considers herself a “black woman” and relates to the race of her father, rather than that of her loving mother who raised her and loved her.
Baraka (Arabic: Blessing from Allah; Spiritual Wisdom) Hussein Obama is being touted as a black man. People will elect him, and are excited over him, in great part, because he is labeled black – the “flavor of the month” I refer to above.
Do blacks seem to be supportive of Obama because he is called “black?”
If a candidate whose skin is darker than Obama’s were to run, especially if running as a Democrat, would that darker skinned candidate get more of the black vote?
So, skin color does matter.
It appears that Dr. Martin Luther King’s entreaties that a man be judged on the content of his character rather than the color of his skin is just a cliche when it comes to politically correct bean counting of the year 2006.
You can bet that when people go to the polls in 2008, they won’t be thinking as much about the character of the candidates, or how they will best serve the country. The voters will be thinking “Who will be more like Santa Claus and bring Christmas early to do things for me and give me things?” and “Who is the best non-white, non-male, best black, or female candidate to choose from? Let’s see, do I want to have a woman, or a black man, or a Hispanic person? Hmmmmm.”
William
William2006 on January 24, 2007 at 4:01 AM
Is this thing on?
Is someone going to tell me that the Black Caucus is not engaging in racism and segregation because blacks cannot be racists?
William
William2006 on January 24, 2007 at 5:52 AM
Hey everyone, did you hear that BOTH coaches going to the Super Bowl are black!!! Yep, I’m not kidding, they’re both black.
JackM on January 24, 2007 at 7:18 AM
In Boston we are now a minority majority, which means, I guess, it won’t be long before the little white children (who are now the minority) get extra weighted points on their college applications; and if two equally qualified candidates apply for a Mass state job the white candidate will be given the position in an effort to help minorities.
Or does this type of equality which we currently lavish on people of color only apply if it is detrimental to white people?
Alden Pyle on January 24, 2007 at 10:09 AM
Personally this didn’t surprise me, but that was due to a misunderstanding on my part.
I thought the whole point of the CBC was to promote the needs of African-American Lawmakers, in which case they shouldn’t let this guy join, regardless of who he represents.
If their goal was to promote the needs of African-Americans in general, then his representing a significant portion of his district might be relevant…
Interesting to see that I was correct, even when I misunderstood who the CBC claims to represent and promote.
gekkobear on January 24, 2007 at 1:18 PM