DNC Chair Candidate Keith Ellison Once Called For Separate Country for Black Americans

[DonViejo]

Last edited Tue Nov 29, 2016, 09:55 AM - Edit history (1)

Here we go, the right wing smear against Ellison begins. Eventually, they'll tie all this together into an anti-Muslim tirade against him...and the Democratic Party if he becomes chair. -- DonViejo

by Alex Griswold | 11:53 am, November 28th, 2016

Democratic Minnesota Representative and Democratic National Committee chairman candidate Keith Ellison once called for slavery reparations and a separate country for black Americans in a university newspaper column.

Ellison’s writings while a student at the University of Minnesota law school– under the name “Keith Hakim”– raised eyebrows when he announced his first congressional run in 2006. The Weekly Standard noted that “Ellison refers to ‘Minister Louis Farrakhan,’ defends Nation of Islam spokesman Khalid Abdul Muhammad, and speaks in the voice of a Nation of Islam advocate… ‘Hakim’ demands reparations for slavery and throws in a demand for an optional separate homeland for American blacks.”

After Ellison announced he was seeking the chairman position, The Daily Caller News Foundation went back and dug up the columns in question, including two the Standard missed. In particular, they confirmed Ellison’s past support for a separate country for African-Americans:

Blacks would have the option of choosing their own land base or remaining in the United States. Since black people toiled most diligently in the southeastern section of the United States, this land, quite naturally, would be most suitable. That means Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi. Blacks, of course, would not be compelled to move to the black state, and, of course, peaceful whites would not be compelled to move away.

-snip-

http://www.mediaite.com/online/dnc-chair-candidate-keith-ellison-once-called-for-separate-country-for-black-americans/

[pbmus]

1. Sorry but Keith is not the right person for the job

[underthematrix]

3. I agree.

[TXCritter]

4. Why not?

[pbmus]

7. To much glitter in the trash

In other words, everyone would be talking about the glitter. And not focusing on anything else.

[Me.]

2. I Do Not Support Him For Head Of DNC

But don't hold this against him either. Can't blame any African American for looking for haven. We need a full-time head of the DNC if we're going to be devoted to the job alone and make strides, not someone who is directly involved in the workings of Congress like the rep and senator who were once in charge.

[angrychair]

8. Full time is a hard slot to fill

The only currently in the running for full time is Gov Dean. I take exception to him as I feel he is just "more of the same" insider lobbyist. We need people that look past federal offices and will also focus on state offices, especially governors and state legislatures. This fixation on the WH is not a realistic long term model for success.

[Me.]

9. As For Me

I have no objection to Dean. He is a smart man who knows the job and how to get things done. He should've remained head after Obama took office but Rahm, out of a fit of pique, ticked off that Dean followed a 50 state strategy (go figure) instead of targeting the money raised for the blue dogs Rahm favored, talked Obama into Wasserman Schultz. Imagine where we’d be if Dean had been allowed to follow his strategy.

[Grey Lemercier]

33. Dean's optics are for fuck, that 25 stone shitbramble Limbaugh and his millions of mouth breathers

(not to mention every other scumbag RW bampot dobber) will just put this on replay 24-7, and then we are fucked yet again.

[edhopper]

41. Limbaugh

is irrelevant these days.

Dean was a great DNC Chair, and the nonsensical "scream" bullshit didn't mean a thing.

We should not act based on what right wing assholes might do.

[Me.]

44. Exactly

[Me.]

43. But Seriously

What do you really think

[Grey Lemercier]

45. if we want to go bold, i say put in Van Jones, the bullshit that ran him off the Obama staff is much

Last edited Tue Nov 29, 2016, 11:27 PM - Edit history (1)

more defensible.

[Me.]

46. Wouldn't Mind Jones

But will stick w/Dean, he has the experience needed to get job done the way it should be

[ancianita]

48. If Van Jones can run anything like a competent 50-state strategy, I'm all for him.

The hell with what any opponents might drag up as oppo.

We stopped listening to them when they stopped listening to us about Trump.

[shraby]

5. I read something like this and all I can think of is "false news" is rampant. How can I be sure

this isn't a false story?
Even places we relied on to give us real news has been tarnished.
I hate this!!

If I can't believe in what I read, I don't know what to do.

[brooklynite]

14. Is the WASHINGTON POST an acceptable news outlet?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062900346.html

[Grey Lemercier]

36. not when they publish absolute guttersnipe trash like...............

Washington Post Disgracefully Promotes a McCarthyite Blacklist From a New, Hidden, and Very Shady Group

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/26/washington-post-disgracefully-promotes-a-mccarthyite-blacklist-from-a-new-hidden-and-very-shady-group/


‘The Washington Post’ Promotes a McCarthyite Blacklist
“PropOrNot” has smeared working journalists as agents of the Kremlin while wrapping itself in a cloak of anonymity.

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-washington-post-promotes-a-mccarthyite-blacklist/


All that said, the Ellison hit piece is true, unfortunately.

[brooklynite]

40. Perhaps if it's true, it's not a hit piece.

[mythology]

64. The Washington Post's article was right

Many far-left sites were and are willing to "report" pretty much anything bad about the U.S. I took a quick look at a couple of the left sites and found such nonsense as the U.S. putting a 1000 troops in Poland was an act of aggression and Russia might respond, ignoring that Russia has invaded multiple countries, or Robert Scheer losing his mind screaming about how Clinton was just like Trump and that Russia wants nothing but the best for Syria.

If they don't want to be labeled as Russian apologists, I have a suggestion about not being a Russian apologist.

[Grey Lemercier]

66. multiple sites on there are not Russian apologists whatsoever

It slaps together a complete hodgepodge of sites, and smears legit ones with guilt by association. Many are simply anti military libertarian sites, or left anti-military sites. Others primarily economic in focus.

They are tossed in with actual fake news sites, real Nazi sites, state run sites, conspiracy sites, etc. The vetting is horrific. Just because you or I may not agree politically with a site in NO way makes it a Russian propaganda site. Hell, for all I know, PropOrNot maybe be Russian backed. Even if not, they are bandwagoning onto the legit problem of Russia actually interfering with our elections, and using it as cover to savage legit opposition or contrarian thought.


Naked Capitalism a Russian front??? RIDICULOUS

Moon of Alabama? pffft highly respected site, ZERO to do with Russia, big time anti Trump

Consortium News?? Robert Parry, on Frontline for PBS, was awarded the George Polk Award for National Reporting in 1984 and the I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence by Harvard's Nieman Foundation in 2015. Yep, he sure is a Putin Stooge! LOLOL

Countercurrents?? lol, they are totally about helping with global warming, sexism, nature, etc, a Indian peace site, ludicrous they are on the list

Truthdig ???? give me a break Chris Hedges, John Dean, Daniel Ellsberg, Max Blumenthal, Greg Palast, Scott Ritter, Amy Goodman, and Juan Cole, yep they are all commie scum! pfft

TruthOut? I guess Paul Krugman, Bill Moyers, etc are closet commies!!! who da thunk!!

Antiwar and Lew Rockwell? (so what if they are libertarian and are anti military intervention, that hardly makes them Russian fronts, smdh, Lew Rockwell has been on the web for like 20 plus years)






Also, the 2 groups behind the list

(1) a neocon think tank

(2) a dodgy anonymous site that has been around for less than 3 months and is utterly opaque


http://fortune.com/2016/11/25/russian-fake-news/

[whathehell]

6. I knew a very level headed black woman who considered that

an option as well.

Point is, even it does sound too extreme to some, it:s in his past...He certainly doesn't seem 'radical' to me now..

[TDBroke]

18. Exactly!

We shouldn't harp on people's past. I don't like the choice but don't focus on his past.

[whathehell]

20. Agreed.

[BobbyDrake]

22. Because bringing up people's past is suddenly wrong? Since when?

Since just after some on the left spent months spouting "Goldwater Girl" and "super predators!" as often as possible? But now, with a left-wing hero's past hitting the spotlight, suddenly pasts don't matter?

The hypocrisy of some on the fringe left can be downright sickening.

[bravenak]

28. I know!!!! This shit is crZy

[BobbyDrake]

38. I'm just so sick of the double standards at this point.

Either these "progressives" have standards or they don't, but it can't be both.

[bravenak]

39. They dont

[leftynyc]

29. Excellent points

What else do we have to judge people by if not their past? Ellison didn't disavow screwy Louis until he absolutely had to. That was enough for me.

[ancianita]

49. We have to stop caring what media or Repubs think and do what it takes to win.

Keep him under the radar the way Reince was. Look at the way the GOP ran under the radar, and get a hard-knocking, smart spending developer of a deep bench for this party.

We need to win, not be validated.

The votes will come when we start to look competent and in touch again.

[leftynyc]

59. Reince only has one job

Head of the RNC. I don't think a part timer (like Elllison would have to be) is the answer. It's Howard Dean.

[DemonGoddess]

24. really now?

Gee, ya think that attitude could've come to the fore sooner? Like during the elections??

[DemocraticWing]

10. This is a horrible smear to read on this board.

He clearly does not advocate for that now, and addressed this years ago from what I can tell. Calling for reparations isn't even that big of a deal, I happen to believe reparations towards oppressed people would do this country some good.

As for the idea about a separate black nation: I've heard about this idea and it seems to have been tossed around quite a bit in the past, but it never got off the ground for a lot of (mostly good) reasons. But let's not pretend like some college kid (which is what Keith was at the time) isn't allowed to see the merit in such an idea when people have discussed it. In my mostly worthless opinion, I don't wish to see the splintering of our nation. However, I understand why some black people might feel that not being subservient to a white supremacist nation (which is what the United States has been historically) would be a good thing.

[DonViejo]

11. I disagree. It's always good to know where the flying monkeys are coming from...

when their tirades against Democrats and our leadership begin, IMHO

[ancianita]

50. It's more that we need a full time party head, not one with split duties. Time on task is

what will really matter.

This deep seated need to for this party to be validated in media has been thrown out the window with this election.

We need to focus on who/what it will take to build a solid bench with a unified vision people can vote for again.

New ways of looking at building this party as a winning brand are more important that this preoccupation with what others will say.

First Bernie, now Ellison. You need to stop provoking doubt.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. We need someone who will help us kick the GOP's rancid asses.

I don't care who he or she is.

[DonViejo]

13. Initially, I thought Ellison could do it but now, I'm agreeing with folks who want a

full time chair...and one who can, as you say, "kick the GOP's rancid asses." At this point, I think the only person who can do that effectively, is Howard Dean. If Mike Bloomberg was a Dem, he might make an interesting choice but...?? You have a list of any potential candidates, DSB?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Not off the top of my head.

In a perfect world the leader would be someone who was not affiliated with the Sanders or Clinton camp.

[DonViejo]

17. I know! The only one I could come up with was Dean...

but while responding to your comment, above, an image of Bloomberg's speech at the DNC came to mind and I thought, "hmmm, maybe!" but, he's not a Dem. What about Russ Feingold?

[RonniePudding]

23. If you're going by past results Dean wins in a walk

Given how things went for Dems between 2006-09. Yes Bush shit himself but Dean had the party in good position to take advantage of that. I like Ellison and I said and wrote a lot of non conformist stuff in college myself so I don't care about this issue at all. My concern is I don't know how anyone can look at the state of the DNC post DWS and conclude it's anything but a full time job.

[Chathamization]

47. DCCC and DSCC chairs are both "part-time", and no one seems bothered by it

Neither can I find any complaints about being "part-time" either of the times Debbie Wasserman Schultz was elected (some people did make the complaint later, when they were angry with her about primary issues). Nor have I seen much evidence that the problem with Kaine and Wasserman Schultz was one of inattention (or that it's a problem now with the DCCC and DSCC chairs).

I can't help but feel that the "part-time" line is mostly spin from some of the people vying for the position who aren't elected officials.

[BlueMTexpat]

56. The Senate and Congressional

chairs are much more targeted. Also, when DWS was DNC Chair, we had a strong and popular Dem President and that takes a load of responsibility off the Chair.

It is VERY different when the Dems do not hold the Presidency. We MUST have a full-time DNC Chair, nothing less.

[Chathamization]

58. I'd say that retaking the House and the Senate are probably at the top of the priority list for Dems

Again, I'm not seeing the logic behind "the heads of those committees can be part-time, that's not that important, but a part-time DNC would be terrible." I mean, even if you don't consider it as important for the DSCC, that's quite different from it being completely unimportant (as we saw from the deafening silence about it when Van Hollen just became chair). The whole argument falls apart and feels more like a weak excuse than a legitimate concern.

Also, I'd need some evidence showing that a strong and popular Democratic president taking a load of responsibility off the chair. I can't really think of any way that Obama took a load off the chair. The OFA? Arguable as to how effective it's been, but even still, he wasn't the director. If that kind of delegation worked, it's not like it couldn't be replicated (though I'm not sure it worked that well).

[BlueMTexpat]

60. You need to look back at the DNC

of 2006 and 2008 when Howard Dean was Chair. That is where the proof of the pudding is.

Having lived through Presidential election cycles since 1944 (when I wasn't really too conscious of what was going on), I am really not interested in trying to convince someone who only began paying attention recently ... and even then, not too well.

[Chathamization]

63. And how about the DCCC in 2006? Is the proof in the pudding for Rahm Emanuel as well?

Hey, maybe that's evidence that a part-time chair is superior!

[BlueMTexpat]

65. Rahm Emanuel fought Dean

every step of the way in 2006 and 2008. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/howard-deans-vindication-six-years-lat

Rahm's fashion prevailed after 2008 and we all saw what happened in 2010 and 2012 while Rahm was driving policy from the WH.

[BlueMTexpat]

55. Dean is The One!

He proved that he can deliver in 2006 and 2008.

Had he not been deliberately sidelined by the Rahm Emanuel faction after 2008, we would likely have a much stronger Dem party today.

[dembotoz]

15. keith sets a new coarse...howard perhaps not so much

look to see whom my state dnc reps seem to support....

and then i want someone else.....

[KittyWampus]

19. He said what he said. He can defend it, explain it or not.

I've been persuaded to support reparations under certain conditions.

Let him try and persuade America of his stances. Let him expound on his views from years ago.

I don't see much in Ellison to indicate he's a good candidate for DNC chair.

[DemocraticSocialist8]

21. I don't see why people are flipping out over this

This is basically a reparations position. Now maybe some here don't agree with reparations, but that doesn't mean he can't be a damn good DNC leader.

[DemonGoddess]

25. I have nothing against Ellison as a politician

Having said that, I do believe we cannot have a politician holding a seat as chair again. That will not be helpful. We need someone who will be able to work at this FULL TIME.

[leftynyc]

26. I want Howard Dean

This is just ANOTHER reason not to want Ellison in that job. His support for screwy Louis was enough to have the thought of him as DNC chair nauseate me. If he's in, they wont get a fucking dime from me, not one phone call, not one door knocked on.

[BlueMTexpat]

53. a million or so about Dean!

Dean is the ONLY Dem who has fully understood how to make a 50-state strategy work.

I am solidly behind him!

[SpankMe]

27. I'd like to see a separate country for conservative Americans. n/t

[bravenak]

30. Me too

[Bucky]

57. No, not Texas!! We just barely turned Harris County (Houston) blue.

Don't you dare take my purple state from me and stick me on a Red State reservation.

[Starry Messenger]

31. I like Ellison, and I like him in Congress.

I don't know what actual chops he has to be the DNC chair, I feel like people who want him there just want a progressive, without looking at if he has a resume to get lots of elections won.

[bravenak]

32. A separate nation would end up being one huge plantation, a third world nation within this nation

I would not move

[still_one]

34. Keith Ellison is a solid progressive, but the right wing with the media's assistance will spew every

LIE and misrepresentation. These distractions, LIES, will be constantly hurled at Keith, and he will have to defend them while at the same time doing his job as a DNC chair.

He is also an active Representative. A DNC chair needs to devote full time to being a DNC chair

[BainsBane]

35. I'm glad the press isn't combing through my college papers

I'm sure I said some shit. I know I did.

[flamingdem]

42. Bernie wants him

Bernie wants Dean much less..

[BlueMTexpat]

51. I do NOT support any candidate

for the DNC who is already holding office.

We need every one of our Dem Senators and Congressional Reps fighting as hard as they can in the trenches - and convincing as many Republicans as they can to join them - to prevent Trump's Draconian agenda from being enacted.

We also need a DNC Chair who can devote full-time to the job.

[Cha]

61. Me neither, BlueMT!

How are you doing?

[BlueMTexpat]

62. So good to "see" you, Cha!

I am back in the USA - although I almost did not return at all, following the travesty of an election in 2016. I am heartened by the fact that Hillary won the popular vote, hands down. But I am sickened by Trump's Cabinet nominees, etc.

I was dreading our Thanksgiving Day meal - deferred until Sunday because our grown kids have obligations to their in-laws as well and we didn't have room for everyone - but it actually turned out well. My family uniformly turned out to be Hillary Clinton supporters, even those who had been Bernie supporters in the primaries. One DIL, who is Republican, was happy about the Senate outcome (I'm not, of course), but is absolutely appalled by Trump and is in almost as much disbelief as I myself.

I am among those who will never accept this outcome. I will never refer to Trump as "President" and am happy that when I am in the US, I live in MD in an area where diversity of race, ethnicity, religion and culture is valued and appreciated. But I am already longing to return to my Swiss haven - or anywhere else. I detest what is happening here so much.

I will never forgive those who deliberately voted for hatred, racism, misogyny, and bigotry. If they counted themselves among my friends before, they can count on that no longer. If they are family members - and yes, some are - I repudiate them. They can protest all they want that THEY are NOT those things. But their votes belie their words. I am done with them.

[still_one]

52. That is exactly right it is a lie, and so is that other lie that he has connections to the Nation of

Islam, but that will NOT stop the Right Wing nor will it stop the media from spewing it, and he will be an unnecessary distraction if he is DNC chair.

He is also an active representative, and the DNC should be a full time job

[JHan]

54. Alex Griswold is a Tool. That is all.

[tenderfoot]

67. Right wing bullshit written by a right wing bullshit artist

eom