Patterico's Pontifications

1/24/2007

Your Kind Not Wanted

Filed under: General,Race — Patterico @ 6:53 am



The Congressional Black Caucus says that it was founded to allow its members “to address the legislative concerns of black and minority citizens.” So a newly elected representative asked to join. He is a “liberal” who ran “in a majority African American district.” He wanted to address the legislative concerns of the black and minority citizens in his district, and thought this would be a good way to do it.

He is also white.

The message got to him that they really didn’t want his type in their group:

Tennessee Democrat Stephen I. Cohen made a novel pledge on the campaign trail last year: If elected, he would seek to become the first white member of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Now that he’s a freshman in Congress, Cohen has changed his plans. He said he has dropped his bid after several current and former caucus members made it clear to him that whites need not apply.

“I think they’re real happy I’m not going to join,” said Cohen, who succeeded Rep. Harold Ford, D-Tenn., in the Memphis district. “It’s their caucus and they do things their way. You don’t force your way in. You need to be invited.”

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.”

Other members, including the new chairwoman, Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., and Clay’s son, Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., agreed.

“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.”

I wonder what would happen if they wrote down that rule.

(All links via Allah.)

34 Responses to “Your Kind Not Wanted”

  1. If black citizens can have unique legislative concerns, can white people not?

    Diffus (ead439)

  2. Sounds like a violation of the Civil Rights Act to me. But what do I know, I’m not a lawmaker.

    Dan S (8771d0)

  3. Where does funding for the CBC come from? Does that matter?

    Herosmith (5c621d)

  4. Congressional Black Caucus

    [Click on PRIORITIES. Scroll down to “FOCUSING ON EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC SECURITY
    –BUILDING WEALTH AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT…”]

    The CBC supports:
    1. Eradicating employment discrimination and ensuring the employment of a diverse work force by employers in the private sector and in government (including staffs of Committees and members of Congress);

    [Scroll down to CONCLUSION.]

    CONCLUSION
    The mission and objective of the CBC and our Agenda for the 109th Congress continues to be improving the condition of African-American people. However, the CBC has never sought to limit the benefits of its endeavors to African-Americans. Indeed, the members of the CBC firmly believe that the priorities outlined in this Agenda will benefit all Americans and will make our country better for all people. We invite all Americans to join us in the quest to remove disparities and barriers that increase the burden or make it impossible for individuals to achieve their full potential. African-Americans will be better for it and America will be better for it, too.

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  5. Freedom riders? Didn’t need no white folk then.

    Sure.

    Attila (Pillage Idiot) (88e3e3)

  6. Nothing, would be my guess.

    km (910b19)

  7. The CBC invites all Americans to join them … but whites need to help from the back of the CBC bus.

    DRJ (f4c219)

  8. I believe that I was in fifth grade when I read this story related by a white teacher of black children in the “back of the bus” days:

    He took his students on a field trip on a public bus and sat in the back with them. The bus driver walked up to him and said, “Sir, you should be sitting in the front of the bus”. The teacher replied, “Driver, I have colored blood too”.

    One of his students chided him, kiddingly: “Sir, you’re always telling us not to lie, but I believe you just did.”

    And the teacher said: “No, I did not. My blood is the same color as yours. Red.”

    nk (32c481)

  9. You gotta ask, would they have allowed Bill Clinton in?

    Bubba Clinton, “…the first black American President…” would certainly have been allowed to join. After all, he “feel[s] your pain.”

    Dubya (c16726)

  10. 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.”

    …and the next time that uppity white boy comes around, we will fetch the fire hoses and police dogs on him.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  11. One memmber of the CONRESIONAL BLACK CACUS one MAJOR OWENS has tried to repeal the 2nd amendment and sponsor laws for gun confiscation i say MAYOR OWENS should be deported to CHINA or CUBA where he can live with other socialist scum

    krazy kagu (9a4519)

  12. I’m pretty sure that Congress exempted itself from the Civil Rights laws. And there are those pesky Constitutional provisions about Congress setting its own rules.

    So, nothing would happen unless the Congress decides it should.

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  13. I’m not a big fan of the CBC which seems to be more about the interests of black congressmen than black Americans. But this isn’t even anywhere close to civil rights era abuses.

    Polybius (7cd3c5)

  14. Wasn’t there a story back in the heady days of the GOP Congressional sweep of 1994 that the new majority was going to eliminate the extra funding that supported staff positions for the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Latino Caucus? Of course, this was attacked by the liberal gatekeepers as an extremely racist and coldhearted thing to do, so I don’t remember if Gingrich & Co. followed through with it. If they did manage to cut or eliminate the extra funding, it would be interesting to see if the new majority has subsequently restored it.

    JVW (835d09)

  15. They say: Hey little boy, you can’t go
    Where the others go
    ‘Cause you don’t look like they do.
    I said: Hey old man how can you stand
    To think that way
    And did you really think about it
    Before you made the rules.

    He said: Son,
    That’s just the way it is
    Some things will never change
    That’s just the way it is

    Socratease (64f814)

  16. Will they accept whites who are for reparations?

    TruthProbe (b0f421)

  17. I’m not a big fan of the CBC which seems to be more about the interests of black congressmen than black Americans. But this isn’t even anywhere close to civil rights era abuses.

    Comment by Polybius — 1/24/2007 @ 4:09 pm

    It doesn’t have to be ‘close to the civil rights era abuses’ to still be wrong Poly.

    Discrimination should be wrong NO MATTER who is discriminated against. Sadly that is not true in this country.

    Lord Nazh (3465cc)

  18. And the double standard in Congress is really starting to get annoying. Not JUST on this.

    “We MAKE laws, we don’t abide by them!”

    Dan S (8771d0)

  19. Doesn’t the CBC have the 1st amendment right to assemble with whomever they want to assemble?

    kaf (85d510)

  20. Sorry, CBC is racist. Affirmative action is racist. But the liberals wanted to “Make things” right…well we told you so. So put on your big boy underwear and cowboy up. Eliminate all race based quotas, programs etc. And let sheer merit decide.
    I am personally fatigued by the allegation that “My people” were responsible for the Black Mans’ plight.
    For the record, while this country fought for the abolition of slavery, “My people” were being killed by the hundreds in Pogroms.
    I hope that Cohen wasn’t surprised by the CBC action.

    paul from fl (967602)

  21. Yup. With race hustlers and poverty pimps, if they want to, even. They can tell those suckass liberal white boys to just “get out of our face and just keeping voting for that ‘entitlement’ money. My mistress and and my illegitimate daughter (cf. Jesse Jackson) need a house and 60,000.00 taxpayer dollars a year”.

    nk (35ba30)

  22. I am all for reparations. Once we decide what the total cost is, I will also be asking for payments to the families of the 600K plus soldiers who died in the Civil War fighting for their freedom. Of course, we’ll also have to figure in businesses that were destroyed during the war, as people who’s lives were adversely affected by the war.

    Jack Burton (40fb78)

  23. Doesn’t the CBC have the 1st amendment right to assemble with whomever they want to assemble?

    Of course they do. The issue is hypocrisy.

    aunursa (d3e6a3)

  24. I’m sorry for “my illegitimate daughter” in my comment #20. That’s not how I think when I take the trouble to think. It should have been “my mistress and our daughter”. No child is illegitimate although its parents may very well be.

    (It was addressed to kaf’s #18 BTW.)

    nk (35ba30)

  25. Doesn’t the CBC have the 1st amendment right to assemble with whomever they want to assemble?

    Unless, of course, the race based exclusion affects interstate commerce.

    4th generation buck (57ebf8)

  26. It doesn’t have to be ‘close to the civil rights era abuses’ to still be wrong Poly.
    Oh I agree entirely. That’s why I was pointing out it’s not helpful when people compare it to the abuses of that era (e.g. fire-hoses and sitting-on-the-back-of-the-bus).

    Polybius (7cd3c5)

  27. Aunursa is correct, the right to assemble with whomever one choses IS one of our rights.

    I hope that wench Ms. Birk is paying attention here, she should be sending an apology to Hooty Johnson any day now.

    doubled (6497b1)

  28. They have a right to assemble with whomever they want, but NOT if they receive taxpayer funds for their operations. It was my understanding that the CBC, apart from the usual congressional members staff allocation, received funds to hire separate CBC staff members who worked only on CBC-related matters. It was that funding that Newt & Co. tried to end when they took control of Congress. If they are still receiving these funds, I don’t see how they can get away with denying anyone membership based upon race.

    JVW (92fbde)

  29. Looks like Tancredo’s calling for the CBC to be abolished now. That’ll draw fire for being “racist”.

    Savor the irony.

    mojo (feef50)

  30. [racist comment deleted]

    aaron (7eb003)

  31. I agree with aaron [rest of racist comment deleted]

    sarah (7eb003)

  32. Really, sarah? You agree with aaron? What a coincidence! I never would have guessed, what with your comments coming five minutes apart, from the same IP address, on a months-old thread.

    A blatant attempt to salt the comments with racism.

    Patterico (5b0b7f)

  33. [racist comment deleted].

    sarah (7eb003)

  34. Are you a leftist trying to put racist comments here?

    Here is your IP. Now cut it out.

    Patterico (5b0b7f)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2728 secs.