Is Lous Farrakhan the 2005 Ralph Nader?

[CatWoman]

how many more flame wars and bashing threads can we endure?

And for what?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. No. Quit giving him publicity. Let him sink.

[CatWoman]

2. Wrong on both counts.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

47. Your point is murky and not advanced by merely writing "wrong"

Your point is murky and not advanced by merely writing "wrong".

My point is clear. Stop giving Louis Farrakhan free publicity. Let him sink to obscurity again.

[CatWoman]

49. what if I say "no"?

what if I feel like he doesn't belong in "obscurity"?

My point is even clearer.

[goclark]

70. LF is not Katrina! He is in no way drowning

His March instantly put his message in the spotlight to millions.

You may try to forget him but his message was supported by so many that your thoughts won't count.

[mandyky]

127. He has never been obscure in the African American community

He had some good ideas in his speech last weekend.

[are_we_united_yet]

101. Publicity? Sink?

Your point of view.

[no name no slogan]

3. Didn't you get the meme?

He's the cause of all suffering in the world, going back to at least the middle ages. Plagues, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornados, etc. all have their origin in little old Louis X. :P

We now return you to your regularly scheduled GD circular firing squad...

[CatWoman]

4. *GASP*

You mean, he's even more powerful than the Clenis???

[no name no slogan]

6. CLENIS!

:spray:

Clenis! Oh I love that word! Such fond memories of 1998, when all we had to worry about was the origin of a blue stain on a GAP dress...

:7

[Loonman]

5. Ralph Nader never made any claims

About the "Mothership".

D'oh!

[CatWoman]

7. But Bootsy Collins did. The evil bastard.

[greyl]

16. Farrakhan was totally serious.

There's no comparison between Parliament/Funkadelic and Farrakhan.

[CatWoman]

20. are you saying Parliament wasn't serious??? dude!! wake up!!!

[greyl]

37. It was a dramatic metaphor. You think Sir Nose was real too? ;) nt

[CatWoman]

65. but then again, tis true -- I never learned how to swim

[greyl]

90. Ahh, lemme guess.

You were joking the whole time (in this subthread), right? :)

[ozarkvet]

17. Mothership

Comments were symbolic and are generally taken out of context.

He's an angry black man. He has reasons to be mad. That makes people nervous. That is the real issue.

[txaslftist]

24. He never said he was taken in a mother ship.

He said he had a vision-like experience along those lines.

Saying he claimed to have been taken into a mothership is a right-wing meme and bullshit.

With that said, however, his initial claim that the levies had been deliberately blown up to drown the ninth ward was reckless and illogical. For those comments he should be rightly criticized.

[ozarkvet]

26. Well said.

I don't know if your comment was directed to me, as I am certainly aware of the misrepresentations re: the dream.

Re: the levies; he is prone to hyperbole, as anyone who listens to him well knows.

To boil a very long speech to a couple of sentences, his comments are more accurately portrayed as, "The levies may have been blown up; I don't know. But they were certainly neglected give us lip service and no action."

[Tomee450]

52. Not true.

Farrakhan was repeating what he had been told and like a lot of black people he does not believe that the idea is preposterous given the history of this country. People were expressing their belief that the levee was deliberately blown up even before Farrakhan spoke on the subject.

[goclark]

78. Those were not his claims, every Black person that I know

with family in NO, totally believes it.
I have been hearing it for the last month!

As they have all said, without any coaching from LF, PROVE THAT THE levees WERE NOT SABOTAGED.

That should be easy to do.

I bet if a group of Whites in Malibu thought that the cliff came down mysteriously, the government would have been there in a heartbeat to prove the Malibu citizens right, not wrong.

All the NO's African Americans, not LF, he is just one of many messengers, want is for the government to PROVE IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

The last time I checked , property owners have the right to ask the government anything they want to.

[ErisFiveFingers]

99. How does one prove a negative?

For example, if every single sample were taken to a laboratory, and *no* explosives were found, and *all* of evidence points to a structural flaw, how could one possibly ever prove that the structural flaw wasn't somehow exploited through non-explosive means?

[goclark]

134. The government knows how to prove negatives

every day.

Recall the WMD, how long did most of America believe that they were there because GWB told them so?

Recall how JFK was killed by a "single bullet?"

Finally enough pressure was put on the government to ATTEMPT to explain it away.

Somebody needs to do the Katrina victims the honor of TRYING to let them know that scientifically, it was not possible and it did not happen. Or, just maybe there was a problem with the levees.


Was it 1827 that the levees were sabotaged? This is not impossible!

[ErisFiveFingers]

191. Let me know whwn..

The JFK, RFK, (etc,) *conspracy" has stopped.

You can *never* prove that there wasn't a conpiracy.

[goclark]

193. I didn't say you can prove it but the government

can be made to investigate it. And they did on the other issues.

[Spider Jerusalem]

175. Anyone who's paranoid enough to believe the levees WERE sabotaged...

needs Thorazine. No need to resort to conspiracy to explain an occurrence the causes of which ought to be OBVIOUS to anyone with a rudimentary grasp of logic. Category 4/5 hurricane hits a levee designed to withstand a category THREE hurricane...well, I know what I'd expect to happen. It's not only paranoid, but completely and utterly STUPID to suggest sabotage by sinister and shadowy persons executing an ethnic-cleansing agenda. It's rather hard to believe that ANYONE thinks this nonsense deserves the slightest consideration.

[Tomee450]

180. Given the history

of this country's treatment of blacks, it is not unreasonable for them to believe that something good have been done to break the levee. You should read John Barry's book The Rising Tide. The black district of New Orleans was deliberatelyflooded before to save the white areas. There is a reason why people believe as they do. Furthermore other things have been done to blacks such as the syphilis experiment on black men. So I think it is wrong to suggest that blacks who are suspicious are paranoid. They are not.

[Spider Jerusalem]

181. Yes, they are.

It's paranoia to conclude that an event with a simpler and more rational explanation (e.g. category V storm hits a levee designed to hold up to category III) must have been caused deliberately (to say nothing of ignorant). A reasonable percentage of black people in this country ALSO believe that HIV was created in a laboratory as an ethnic-cleansing agent (which is a flat impossibility, since it's been found to be present in humans as far back as, I think, the 1950's and possibly even the '30's). Doesn't matter whether you think it's JUSTIFIED, it's still paranoia.

[Tomee450]

186. That's your opinion.

I disagree with it and suggest you read a few history books about the black experience in this country. If your government has done horrible things to your community in the past, it is not at all unreasonable to believe they might have done it again. It may not be the case but to call people who know their history paranoid for their belief, is just plain ridiculous. I suppose the Tuskegee experiment didn't happen either. I suppose the deliberate flooding of the black district of NOLa also didn't happen. I suppose during WW11 black soldiers were not forced to unload dangerous munitions while white soldiers were exempt. I suppose the black town of Rosewood Florida wasn't burned to the ground, and I suppose the Tulsa authorities didn't bomb the black business district of that city. Get Real. Black people have good reason to be suspicious. There would be something wrong if they weren't at least skeptical. To call them paranoid is disgusting and reflects a mind that refuse to see the truth.

[Spider Jerusalem]

188. You know...

I'm aware of all of that history, and a lot else besides. And I stand by my opinion. Some things cross the line from reasonable suspicion to persecution complex. The suggestion of deliberate sabotage in New Orleans this past August is one of them.

[Tomee450]

199. It says a lot about

a person who, aware of the black experience in this country, hangs the paranoid label on blacks who think history may have repeated itself. Speaks volumes.

[radwriter0555]

42. I suppose being a Rev. Moon pal, or being implicated inthe murder of

Malcomb X, living a life of rampant, over the top luxury like his fellow teevee evangelist buddies, funded by his followers, while declaring piety is all just water under the bridge.

Never mind that he cronies up to whomever he can for a free ride and a bucket of cash, and he sees the victims of katrina as a big old cash cow.

Louis has never cared a bit for anyone but himself. He hitches a ride on the nearest star to make some more money for another fine car or a fancy suit. That's IT.

And most importantly, he's a MOONIE. Anyone with any sense would be scared to death of that alignment alone.

[goclark]

80. If we want to be afraid of someone,try George W. Bush

Moonie has little or no impact on by checkbook or my beautiful mind.

You have blindly allowed GWB to spend BILLIONS to find weapons that were no where around.

I don't have to give to Moonie or LF and you don't either.

I am Black and have lived in the community all my life.

The NOI has never asked for one thin dime from me or anyone I know.

You and the others like you on this board are insulting.

Black people are far more politically aware that White people.

Recall that we did not put GWB in office, you did.

[ultraist]

94. Apparently so! Bush's approval rating among Blacks is 2%!

Black people are far more politically aware that White people

[radwriter0555]

96. Your snipey little personal attacks mean you know nothing about me.

Most of my family is black, for one thing. For another, I lead the charge against the bush regime, just as I'm leading the charge against Moonie Farrakhan.

You are simply not educated about the Moonies and about Farrakhan. But if and when he manages to gain a toe hold of power, I won't blame anyone... I'll just simply say again, "I told you so..." as I've been doing since August 2000.

[ultraist]

98. And do your Black family members HATE Farrakhan as much as you do? n/t

[radwriter0555]

108. 2 do, the others dismiss him as simply irrelevent.

Few people are aware of farrakhan's and the GOP's connections and usage of/to the moon organizations, and fewer still are aware of the dangers of the moon organizations; it's not information that makes headlines. It's about understanding an entire politic and discerning the relationships between the politic and the veneer of religion used to gain power.

It's not about hating a man or his message because his skin color is this or because he said that; I can slap any member of the GOP around for something silly like that. It's about knowing who this guy is, and how he studies the use of people in his personal quest for power and control. He's like this peripheral haunt of evil, with a nefarious tinge to it... I look at this guy, I listen to him and I sense a malevolence, a latent evil, a dark intent, and it makes me dig deeper into finding out who he is, and what he wants.

It's a gut instinct made more sinister by knowing who's he's allied himself with... I don't 'hate' people with impunity. I just know evil when I see it.

[Tomee450]

149. Not surprising at all.

"I don't 'hate' people with impunity. I just know evil when I see it."

For some, evil is that African American who is not afraid to speak out against the ills of this society which includes racism. This happens regularly to black people who speak up. Phony articles are written to discredit them and certain people predisposed to believe the worst, people who never want racism discussed, always accept such reports. Martin Luther King was called a communist and a trouble maker. Articles were written describing him as such. Were they true? No. I am not going to readily believe reports written by anyone about an outspoken black person unless they are written by people who are credible. The media in this country is not controlled by blacks. Most of the think tanks in this country are not controlled by blacks. Many in the majority population have shown their dislike of African Americans for years. Why should African Americans accept reports about a member of their race given by people who hate them or by the blacks who do their bidding. Makes no sense whatsoever.

[400Years]

just an excuse to bash an easy target I guess

instead of concentrating on real problems.

I think some people get off on that since they
feel impotent in the face of our real problems.

[goclark]

84. I agree 400 years

LF is NOT the problem in White America or Black America.

GWB is the problem.

[sabbat hunter]

8. farrakhan

is a anti semite, a race baiter and a divider. he deserves scorn and should be minimized. he gives the progressive movement a bad name.

he claims to support morality, yet takes money from russell simmons and says nothing about rappers like 50 cent whose lyrics are deplorable.

[CatWoman]

13. yeah -- we get it already.

I like his Russell Simmons policy, yet I deplore his 50 Cent policy.

the jerk!!!!

[sabbat hunter]

23. he is

he is a creep, a racist, and deserves scorn. he was probably behind the slaying of malcom X (who at least in his later years learned from his mistakes and was reaching out to all to strive for equality)


i for one cannot see how you can call yourself a progressive and support farakkan in any way

[NoSheep]

77. I remember an article he contributed to saying eating green vegetables

was a bad thing. Basically telling folks to lay off the collards and turnip greens cause it was bringing them down. That was pretty much all I needed to know. Crazy-ass fucker.

[CatWoman]

130. it's not the greens -- it's the fatty seasoning meat that most of us use

[Tomee450]

150. Your comment is just

plain ridiculous and shows just how little you know about the eating habits of black people. Farrakhan was probably talking about the salt pork and other fatty meats used to season the greens and other vegetables.

[goclark]

135. Cat Woman ~ how many on this thread WATCHED the MARCH ?

That is the question that I want answered.

In my mind, if a person did not watch the MARCH, they don't have a clue. Not only are they clueless, they missed one of the most historical events for African Americans since MLK's I HAVE A DREAM.

You watched, I watched and a few others.

Some here are talking about ideas that are so out of touch with what I saw on my TV and hear in the African American community, I am getting very weary.

Speakers at the March, expressing total support for each other and LF were Cornel West, John Conyers, Sheila Jackson Lee, Jesse, Al and on and on and on and on.

Do you think these leaders would lay their careers on the line for someone that they believed was not fighting for YOUR Democratic hopes and dreams!

I am growing weary of trying to educate Democratic Underground!

So weary in fact that I have been speaking to some of my friends about a thought that maybe the Democratic party can not address the issues of African Americans.

So weary that maybe AA's should just sit out the next election and let the White votes on DU, that hate LF so much, need to get extra busy.

So busy that they should elect the Democratic Party without our sweat and blood.

What would be the results for African Americans?
We would not have to be insulted by people that want to reject ONE of our leaders and try to do our thinking for us.

What would be the result of a Democratic Party without the support of AA's?

The same thing we got this time, another GWB in the White house!

Don't push us White America! Don't push us!

African Americans are the HEART and the SOUL of the Democratic Party!

If I showed some of these posts to my friends thy would not believe that they were reading the thoughts of "Liberal" and compassionate Democrats!

Listen to what Catwomen and others are trying to show you.

One reason that I love being a Democrat is that we have the mental ability to keep an open mind and to care about others.

Some of you are really showing your colors on this issue, get over it! If you can't listen and learn on this issue you don't deserve a better America.

[Prodemsouth]

14. Since when was he part of the "progressive movement"

n/t

[sabbat hunter]

18. if you ask conservatives

they consider him 'one of us' even though we know he isnt.

but the perception by many moderates is there.

[CatWoman]

22. who give a shit what conservatives "think"???

[sabbat hunter]

25. hate to tell you

we should. if it is perceived that the progressive movement is associated with him it minimizes us.

most of america is moderate, but if they believe someone like farakkan is associated with the progressives, they wont support us.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

46. Then quit giving LF publicity. Let him sink.

[CatWoman]

48. I sure didn't see you lamenting the need to let him sink on the other

100 threads -- especially the ones started by the same poster who keeps telling us that the man is crazy.

There is a "hide thread" function, you know.

I'm not sure if you were here during the Nader wars, but they continued for two whole years.

I lost a lot of friends in the process.

I'll let it sink when the flamewarriors let it sink.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

53. I didn't see 98 of the 100 threads you saw.

Make up your mind. If you want to flame the Farrakhan (pro or con) posters, then flame them in their own threads.

[goclark]

82. He ain't sinking ~ those that Heard the message

at the March are completely energized by all of the speakers that were there on Saturday.

African Americans do not need a ticket from White People to think.

Is this Freeper Land?

[Inland]

30. Well, he's black. So he must be liberal. Same mistake many in DU make.

Farrakhan isn't a liberal. He's a nationalist, and it isn't even the American nation. But because he's black and decries racism and hates Bush, we think he must be liberal. He's not, and he's not a conservative. He's on a different spectrum altogether.

[goclark]

138. No one said he was Liberal, he is World Famous Now

For those of us who saw the March, he was expressing a WORLD view.

[Prodemsouth]

34. Well its up to us to get rid of preceptions something we have

not been good at all.

[are_we_united_yet]

103. Let's ask the Conservatives if invading Iraq is a good thing

Oh wait....

[are_we_united_yet]

102. Yeah

maybe he should be more like W or Cheney

[Metta]

9. They hold different sides of the same coin.

They're acting out polar/ complementary aspects of shared archtypes. Savior/ martyr/ rejected warrior. They feed each other.

[charlie]

10. Appears so

Seems everybody's got to have their own "I Hate 'Im Worse Than You, Plus a Million" vanity thread, instead of sticking a comment in one already going. Just like Nader.

[CatWoman]

11. I don't consider this to be a "vanity" thread

I'm asking a valid question.

besides -- I've responded in the other threads.

[charlie]

19. No, not you

I'm agreeing with you...

[oasis]

12. He's a 2005 Pied Piper. His tune will lure docile negroes away from Dems.

:scared:

[CatWoman]

15. swing low. sweet chariot. coming for to carry me

away from the Democratic party.

[Skidmore]

21. I sure hope you are being sarcastic.

The docile Democrats are losing people without lifting a finger. And apparently they don't give a flying ....fig. If the Dems had spent the last two election seasons seriously working on 1) voting reform 2) developing a platform that addresses the needs of the working person and the poor 3) active listening to all groups 4) allowing active participation by more than just the same old same old same old, and 5) acting like an opposition party, you would have different lyrics to your tune.

Farrakhan spoke truth. Truth trumps PR. Truth trumps lies. Truth trumps posturing BS.

[oasis]

31. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". It's the anti-Farrakkan bunch who

don't get it. The post was designed to mock them for their short sightedness.

[tatertop]

36. until there is equality for Blacks, men like Farrakhan are needed

"I call for justice for the suffering masses of Black people and all oppressed people throughout the world."

[radwriter0555]

44. But you don't GET it. He's lying... farrakhan has merely latched on to the

victims of katrina to make a new pile of cash for his own self. He has never demonstrated an iota of compassion for anyone but himself.

Show us what good he's done. What money has he donated, while he's living in fine, luxurious homes, driving lovely cars, like the teevee evangelists we mock daily. He's no different. He's just peddling it to a different set of people.

Come on, show us the fantastic charitable efforts of farrakhan and what changes he wants to make.

What are his solutions?

To have Rev. Moon attend more speeches and hold more rallies?

[Tomee450]

55. All these Farrakhan bashing

is doing is making black people wonder about Democrats. Most African Americans posters have said repeatedly that they agree with his message and that it's not about Farrakhan. You haters have made it clear, just like Bush, that you have absolutely no respect for black people. You absolutely refuse to accept the fact that black people are intelligent and can think and speak for themselves. We are smart enough to know who is acting in the best interest of our community.

I am becoming more and more disgusted with democrats who constantly attack black leaders, even after we have told them of our willingness to work with someone who has a positive message and is trying to improve our community. I consider this constant bashing of black leaders to be a real insult and a deep lack of respect. We've told you how we feel, yet you continue to insult. I am beginning to wonder just what the party I've supported all my life is about. If it's not Farrakhan, its Jesse Jackson or Sharpton. It seems that all outspoken black men will be attacked, even by so called progressives. I am personally very sick of the attacks. If you don't like Farrakhan fine. But stop insisting that black people share your view. You are not black, you don't live our lives. Until you have walked in our shoes, you have no right to tell us what we should think or who should be our leaders.

[tatertop]

72. exactly, my friend

how easy it is for white people to
dis a Black man who fights for Blacks.
If only they could be Black in america for three
months: they would come around.

[CatWoman]

74. 3 months my ass -- they wouldn't last 3 days

they all need to rent or buy "Black like Me"

[tatertop]

79. Lessons we need to learn

[radwriter0555]

93. Most of my family is black. They don't think I hate them, they know Moonie

propoganda and lies when they see it. The question is why don't YOU know the Moonie lies when you see them?

Hey, if you want the moonies taking control of your family and friends, by all means, you just go ahead and enjoy that. But I still have the right to tell YOU and your family that you're falling under the snake oil pitch of the Moonies.

And get this, I LIKE Jackson and Sharpton. But I can't imagine what you think they have in common with Farrakhan other than the color of their skin. Jackson and Sharpton are good men who do good things.

Farrakhan is evil incarnate, and a MOONIE.

[Tomee450]

151. I the black members

of your family share your views, they are most unusual. I have never seen displayed among African Americans the kind of hostility to Farrakhan that is shown here by some posters. Most African Americans have enough sense not to accept reports coming from a news media that has often been untruthful when reporting on the black race. People can write anything but what they write does not have to be true. I find the constant attack on black leaders very disheartening. I find insisting that blacks accept only leaders approved by people not from their community insulting. Once again, it's not Farrakhan, it's his message of black dignity, black self reliance, black responsibility for their community that is so attractive. YOU and others want black people to discard someone who has the power to get millions of people to listen. It shows a lack of concern about the black community and a determination to seek vengeance against Farrakhan for what you perceive as his bigotry. We have problems in our community that need to be addressed. If Farrakhan can bring people together to solve these problems, that is a good thing.

[cynatnite]

100. What a load of shit

I started the Farrakhan questioning because I was surprised at the support he recieved on DU. In my mind, he's no different than Falwel and Robertson.

Those pinheads spout venom, but still have a following because they 'claim' to be christian and talk the christian talk. Farrakhan does what they do. It's hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

I could care less who likes him and why. I know I don't like the man for his racist, sexist, homophobic and anti-semitic beliefs. Anyone who can defend this man I will call Farrakhan apologists.

Sure he has some appeal to some people, but so does Falwel, Robertson, and bush. I attack the man for the vile messages he has preached. He's said these things for many years and I'm not changing my views of him based on a few recent statements that happen to coincide with my own.

This isn't about color and I'm offended you think it is. You're accusing those of us who don't like Farrakhan of being racists. It doesn't matter that most here like Sharpton, Jackson or other black leaders. It's because some of us don't like one man who happens to be black.

You can think how you want about Farrakhan. That's your choice and your right. But don't attack others because their opinions are not yours. Whether I'm black, white or whatever, it doesn't matter. My opinion counts just as much as anyone elses.

[Behind the Aegis]

113. Brava!!!

I have not seen one poster attacking LF's message at the march. The attacks have been on his un-repentant bigotry toward Jews, gays, and a few others. But, then again, hating Jews and gays never really goes out of style either.

You nailed it with these false attacks about non-supporters being racist. I despise LF because he is a bigot, not because he is Black! It is the same reason I despise Duke, Buchannan, Robertson, and others. How many of these "new" racists (because they don't support LF) were the same people cheering on Al Sharpton at the Democratic Rally? Jesse Jackson and his Rainbow Coalition? Or when the wonderful Stephanie Tubbs Jones, one of the ONLY people to challenge the elections, was praised here? Did all us 'racists' suddenly forget they were African-Americans?!

So, I should ask...if one is such a great supporter of LF...are you to a firm supporter of Alan Keys?! If not, aren't YOU a racist?! Oh wait, I bet you don't support him because of his MESSAGE, not because of his ethnic background!

I am appalled at the amount of racism in this country, but I am as equally appalled at the inability to distinguish racism and criticism based on something other than "race." As I appalled as I am, I can honestly say, I am not surprised by either.

BIGOTRY is NOT a LIBERAL value!

[cynatnite]

114. Brava right back at you :)

I remembered earlier that there are quite a few on DU who don't like Hillary. Many have been very blunt in their opinions of her. I do like her, but I'm not going to say they shouldn't criticize her because they're not a woman. I'm not going to say they are sexist for doing so.

It's more disturbing for me to see those who don't like the man for his views and statements be accused of racism. If that were true, we would attack Waters, Conyers, Sharpton and every other black leader.

I do recall when Keys was running last year that he was derided on a regular basis here at DU. No one was calling anyone racist for it.

The rampant hypocrisy is disgusting.

[Behind the Aegis]

116. Actually...it's "Bravo" for me. I am a guy. :)

I had to add that little jab. :)

You are very right. I have not seen ANYONE say Hillary can't run because she is a woman! I may or may not agree, but her qualities do not lie in her sex. Conyers is a hero here, and rightly so. One of my faves...Cornel West! That man is the deal! Yet, it has been implied I am a racist because I don't support a Jew-hating, queer-hating man! Since I am both a Jew and gay, I really resent that! I despise Jew-hating queers. And, I despise queer-hating Jews. So what am I?!

Someone even made a comment to suggest that Duke would get a better reception here. I suggested he contact the admins first, then post a "I support what David Duke said about the Iraq war" thread and see how well that went over! I am thinking it would fly like a lead balloon and be as well received as a fart in a diving helmet!

You are right, the hypocrisy about this person is ASTOUNDING!

[Tomee450]

155. Not hypocrisy but truth.

You reject the truth but then that is not unexpected. If you think that I am alone in seeing the double standard, the racism evident in some of these posts, you are very much mistaken. People who want blacks to reject someone who can help them simply because he is perceived to be a bigot by another community are simply ridiculous. It is nothing but pure selfishness and shows just how little they care about the black community. That is so obvious. If someone is drowning, he doesn't care who throws him a rope. You and a few others spend all this time talking about Farrakhan. You really need to look around you; the anti-semites are mostly not found in the black community but elsewhere. I was surprised to find just how much anti-semitism there is in this country and it certainly was not coming from African Americans. It is you an others who are the hypocrites. You have one standard for black people and another for everyone else.

I stand by what I wrote. This discussion has been quite enlightening even though disheartening. Posters have been insulting and dismissive of the black point of view demanding as always that we accept your assessment of a member of our community, demanding that we reject any help he has to offer because you believe him deserving only of hatred.
Nothing but pure selfishness.

[cynatnite]

159. The truth is in Farrakhan's words over the last 20 years...

He's been openly homophobic, racist, sexist and anti-semetic.

You see the bashing of one individual as being racism even though black leaders like Conyers, Waters, Sharpton and others get wide suppport here at DU. That destroys your claim of racism and shines a light on the fact that you have no real excuse to support a man such as this.

Farrakhan is no different than Robertson or Falwell. They are of the same ilk and I refuse to ignore his vile crap just because he's black. That's what you are telling me I should do. I should ignore the horrible things he's said because he's black. :eyes:

Stand by what you wrote if you want. Defend this so-called person and keep defending him when he spews his hateful rhetoric against jews and others. Defend his RW ways. Be comfortable in that place you're in.

[Tomee450]

164. I do stand by what I wrote.

To demand that blacks reject someone from their community who is trying to improve conditions simply because you think he is a bigot is pure selfishness. And I will repeat there a double standard. There are many bigots in this country but the bigotry of whites is forgotten if they show change as in the case of Senator Byrd. Byrd is still a very conservative democrat who does not always vote the way some blacks would like but we still never attack him. He was in a terrible organization that killed thousands. If Farrakhan had ever been in such an organization he would never have been elected to public office.There are many bigots out there but the obsession in this country is only with alleged black bigots. A double standard.

[cynatnite]

166. People can accept or reject him...

You put too much stock in my opinions. :eyes:

I don't just 'think' he is a bigot. It's a fact. His own words prove it.

The only double standard there is is yours. You refuse to acknowledge the wide support most black leaders get here at DU. You call it racism because many don't support Farrakhan.

Using Byrd as in comparison is apples and oranges. The man was a member of the KKK in his youth and he's in his 80's now. He's long said it was a mistake and regrets it. This is a matter of public record and he in no way spews the same garbage as Farrakhan.

You're arguments are very weak.

[Tomee450]

182. No it's your arguments that

are weak. YOU want blacks to hate a member of our community because you hate him. You want us to disregard his help because you don't like him. And comparing Byrd and Farrakhan is correct. One has a worse reputation than the other. Farrakhan's NOI has killed no one, Byrd's former organization has. Byrd's history is excused but the hate for Farrakhan continues. I don't care if you don't support Farrakhan and I don't think he cares either. What I don't like is the difference in treatment given to blacks and whites who offend. Farrakhan is a good example. He is no worse a bigot than Horowitz or Buchanan yet we don't have the kind of vitriol directed at them that is hurled at Farrakhan. That's what I object to and see as racist. No one talks about Buchanan today except in a positive light, appreciating his comments on Bush. Farrakhan last Saturday and for the past few years has also been positive yet you choose to hound him. That difference is obvious to most black people.

[cynatnite]

185. I don't care who likes him or not...

Where you keep getting this 'I don't want blacks to like him' I have no clue. You're in a bad way if you think my opinions of ONE man somehow means that I want EVERYONE else to not like him. You actually think I must have some kind of power :eyes:

Byrd's excused because his membership was over 60 years ago and he has NOT continued to spew the vitriolic hate over a long period of time such as Farrakhan has. Byrd's publicly apologized for his youthful indiscretion. Farrakhan has not and his hateful rhetoric has been going on for the past 20 years with no remorse or retraction.

What I don't like is the difference in treatment given to blacks and whites who offend.

Prove this statement here at DU. I put Farrakhan in the same group as Falwel and Robertson.

Buchanan is still highly disliked here at DU even though he says a few things I can agree with. He's still an anti-semitic and racist RW nutjob. He's never apoligized or shown any remorse for his hateful rhetoric. No one is excusing his behavior.

You've yet to explain away the wide support black leaders get here at DU and how the criticism of ONE somehow equates to racism. Explain that logically rather than paint a wide stroke over everyone who doesn't like Farrakhan for very valid reasons.

[donheld]

189. Tomee you rock!

Sometimes I feel like it's bigots calling others bigots. Thanks for standing your ground on this issue. If some want to stay ignorant or biased that's their problem.

[Tomee450]

198. Thanks

It's unfortunate that even here, we find attitudes that are just like those to be found at that other right wing site.

[Behind the Aegis]

167. Wrong, yet again!

You reject truth, even when given solid evidence. The only double standard is the one you and others have created. This false assumption that those who don't support Farrakhan must be racists. I take it you don't support David Duke, does that mean you are bigoted against whites?! Of course not! That is a ludicrous suggestion. Yet, when we don't support or agree with LF, we are racists? Yes, there is a double standard...one you have created.

You are right that most anti-Semitism comes from whites, but that does not exempt those who are not white from being beyond reproach!

You are correct that this thread has been enlightening. I have never seen so many apologists for a race-baiter, anti-Semitic, homophobe! Almost EVERY post I have seen has attacked LF as a MAN! I have not seen ONE point attacking the "black point of view." Yet, I have seen claims of it with no valid proof, just conjecture and misdirection. I have seen the false argument of "don't tell Blacks who their leaders should be." When, I have not seen ONE post suggesting that Blacks like "this person" because s/he fits OUR (white) needs.

The selfishness is VERY obvious, don't dare criticize a Black man because then you are a racist, but we can say what ever we want about any topic, even ones for which we are not familiar. Makes me wonder if you would also pop up to defend Alan Keyes if a thread was started about him.

[Tomee450]

184. Absolute rubbish.

African Americans don't object to criticism of their leaders as long as it is fair, as long as they are treated no worse than others guilty of the same offense. People criticize the white bigot, but then they leave it alone. They don't keep at it constantly year after year. They don't go ballistic each time the white bigot appears at a public event. That is the difference. Trent Lott, continues to enjoy a measure of status even after his remarks and no one is harping about him. That's the difference. Another thing that irritates African Americans is that those angry with the black offender, attack blacks who don't agree with their point of view, often demanding that they change their view and reject the offending member of their own community. HOw many Jews have rejected David Horowitz. I see him on television and see his articles in Newspapers. He is invited to speak at college campuses. So there is indeed a difference in the treatment of the black and white offender.

And it's not only Farrakhan. It's Sharpton, Jackson and in the past other outspoken black men. You can deny it all you wish but black people who anger white people are treated far more harshly than whites who offend blacks. I think that is racist.

[cynatnite]

187. I don't recall Trent Lott ever getting a break here or even being defended

It sounds like your issues are more with corporate media than with those of us who don't like the man.

[Tomee450]

153. Baloney

There are many threads about Farrakhan and most of the blacks see the double standard that exist. And you and others are insulting as you seem to demand that we blacks agree with your point of view. We tell you how we feel and you are right back with the same old garbage. If you don't like Farrakhan, fine but don't try to insist that blacks share your opinion of him. Farrakhan is being given the same treatment that other outspoken black men were given. They dared to speak out against racism and they were vilified.

And I will repeat. All of this continuous bashing is making some black people think differently about the party which they have long supported. I am tired of the bashing of black leaders. I don't always agree with them but if their message is positive, I'll support their efforts. You can criticize them. I don't think they should be exempt but the vitriol and the thread after thread attacking a black leader is so unseemly and smacks of nothing but bigotry. And I find that to be wrong and insulting.

Any your vulgar, angry post just proved my point. I talked, but you did not listen. It's only your opinion that's important.

[cynatnite]

157. Where am I insisting others have to agree with me?

It's the bashing of ONE man who is a racist, sexist, homophobic and anti-semitic asshole. He's also a RW nutjob that's no different than Falwell or Robertson.

You continue to ignore the hypocrisy of your statements.

[Tomee450]

162. No, it is you

who are the hypocrite, upset because black people see this issue exactly as it is. A double standard. People are being treated differently based on race and that is clear. Also, the pure selfishness is quite evident as blacks are asked to reject individuals from their community who are trying to improve it. That is wrong, smacks of not caring, pure selfishness. I live in the black community and know of the problems we face. If Farrakhan can help in eradicating those problems, good. I like his message of blacks looking out for each other. Katrina really opened the eyes of many African Americans.

[cynatnite]

163. I don't care if other people see him differently...

some hold tightly to their opinions and beliefs. It's their choice.

How am I and others a racist? Let's be specific here. Don't just rely on criticisms of one man. Racism is based on the color of people's skins and is not a liberal trait. I challenge you to prove that those who critisize Farrakhan are racists even though many of us support people like Waters, Conyers, Sharpton, and other black leaders. Prove that it's racism.

[ultraist]

95. Would you please get off the "cash" thing?

Every single one of your beloved white Democratic leaders (with the exception of Kuchinich) is filthy rich!

Didn't you support John Forbes Kerry?!?!?

[sabbat hunter]

27. let me ask you this

what good do you think farrakhan has done for the country?

[CatWoman]

32. oooooooooooo k!!!

we just leaped all the way to final jeopardy.

must my answer be in the form of a question?

[kwassa]

33. What good had Farrakhan done? Simple.

He made the Million Man March possible, and the Million More, through his effort to bring into being a coalition of blacks with the focused message of responbility, self-reliance, and activism. It is a message that has touched many millions of people.

That is a good thing.

[radwriter0555]

43. The million man march was FUNDED BY MOONIES, the same freaks who brought

you the PROMISE KEEPERS.

[oasis]

59. What was the message at the Million Man March? If you know.

:shrug:

[radwriter0555]

91. The message was about 'unifying black families", men in particular, and

it sure sounds good, doesn't it?

Well hitler was head of the National Socialists too. Weren't they just great? The guys who just got ran out of town on a rail last week for marching as nazis called themselves socialists too. Doesn't mean they represented Socialism.

Now, if you endorse the Moonies, by all means voice your support for farrakhan, for the moonies. But I know what I know about the "Rev." Sun Myung Moon, and I say again, if you LIKE the ideals of the Moonies, especially of their purchase of the republican party, lock, stock and barrel, then you support them.


However, I have to say that if you are a well informed, well read and emotionally balanced person, you will not support the Moonies.

And I honestly don't intend to sound patronizing, but since you don't know anything about the Moonies, I suggest you use your search engines and start reading. You need to read all of it, and a lot of it is redundant, but you need to learn who the Moonies fund, why they fund them, what their vast empire is used for, and what these people actually truly believe. Look at their family, and their followers and discern their intent.

In 2 days let me know how you feel about the Moonies being favored to take control of any group of people -- about being allowed to be take control of you and your family.

And in 2 days if you still favor the work of the Moonies I will make a serious effort to understand why.

[oasis]

141. Why not start a thread about Moonie control of the NOI since you

feel so strongly about it? I'll have my popcorn at the ready.:popcorn:

I'm not about to do two days of research just to disprove your conspiracy theory. Put your "facts" out there in the forum and be prepared to support them.

[ozarkvet]

35. Cleaned up neighborhoods

That the establishment had let go to Hell b/c the people in it are disposible.

Gave his people pride at cleaning up the neighborhoods themselves, without needing some outsider to do it for him.

Got a seat at the table, instead of serving ice tea to a bunch of do-nothings.

[are_we_united_yet]

105. Sweet Mary Mother

Jesus.

[Inland]

28. What's so 2005 about Farrakhan?

He dresses like he's in 1950, preaches an abstemious life, puts women in a secondary position to men, uses a numerology that we only WISH would have died out in the middle ages, and has that old time bigotry based on bad religion.

I think Farrakhan is the 1962 Nader. All of the divisiveness and self promotion without any of the positions.

[Tomee450]

56. Divisiveness?

Well it's not Farrakhan or blacks who are dividing this country. It's the racial discrimination that is never ending. Farrakhan did not pass laws that gave blacks longer prison sentences than whites. It's not blacks beating up whites. It's not blacks who are running to the suburbs to get away from a certain group of people. It's not blacks or Farrakhan who are engaged in voter disenfranchisement. And you are accusing Farrakhan of creating divisiveness? Please

[Inland]

61. Farrakhan's a figure for unity? Of whom?

He's an advocate for blacks as a black nationalist. What's that got to do with uniting anyone except blacks vs. outsiders?

He's not a liberal. He's a nationalist.

[Tomee450]

66. You see what you wish to

see. I believe that whites were invited to the march but not many attended. Farrakhan's message was inclusive. I can't see where one can speak of Farrakhan dividing the nation. This nation has always been divided and it's not because of African Americans or Farrakhan.

[Inland]

67. I don't see my invite.

http://www.millionmanmarch.org/news/open_letter.htm

It's pretty clear the unity and the "us" in the letter are re: blacks.

Unity with whites really isn't Rev. Farrakhan's interest.

He's a black nationalist.

[Tomee450]

73. Farrakhan said on Washington Journal

that whites were welcome. There were a few who did attend. Apparently they understood that they were invited.

[Inland]

76. And maybe they understood correctly. Maybe not.

All I know is that there isn't any reference to unity with whites in Farrakhan's message. In fact, there's no reference to whites at all. Unity with whites isn't his priority.

[Sapphire Blue]

87. How does it feel to be left out? Multiply that by centuries.

[ultraist]

97. Did you watch the speech? I don't think you did

Because Farrakhan did mention whites when he talked about unity.

But so what if he didn't. The NAACP isn't fighting for more rights for whites either. Does that make them racist? :eyes:

[Inland]

123. Farrakhan's a black nationalist.

He fights for more rights for blacks not because he believes in unity and equality, but because he he is for blacks. He's merely picked a side in a racial struggle.

I think the contrast with, say, Martin Luther King makes it pretty apparent. He had a vision of unity and integration, a quintessential liberal ideal. Farrakhan doesn't. At this point, blacks are disadvantaged and that's why you confuse "fighting for more rights" for blacks to be something other than the maintenance of a polity based on race.

[goclark]

133. He talked about helping the poor as a top priority

The last time I check there are millions of poor Whites in this country so that would surely include them.

I guess he figured that White people of good will would understand that if he said poor that would certainly include them.

[readmoreoften]

111. Farrakhan's message was inclusive?

African-American gays and lesbians have been absolutely, consciously excluded from everything. A prominent black gay leader was scrubbed from speaking out at the march.

Farrakhan isn't dividing the nation-- that's for damn sure. But he seems to be doing a good job of dividing African-Americans from one another.

[ultraist]

124. Farrakhan is "dividing African Americans from one another?"

Huh? Conyers, Mel Watt, Jesse Jackson, Sheila Lee Jackson, Al Sharpton and other Black leaders were at the MMM event.

I haven't heard any major Black leaders say he is dividing their community. :shrug: If his message is Black nationalism, how can that encourage division among Blacks? (Although I don't think that's his only message).

How is he "dividing African Americans from one another?"

[obnoxiousdrunk]

29. Reminds me of

what Laura Flanders said on her show. Loius Farrakhan will never be forgiven for what he said 20 + years ago, but Bill Bennett 20 days later is already forgiven and is playing pundit on George Stephanapolous's show. That's how it works these days.

[dsc]

38. He is a bigot, plain and simple

If I came to this board touting a racist gay nationalist who called blacks vile names I suspect I would be roundly condemned. Farrakhan and Robertson are no different at all on gay issues. I would have huge problems with people discussing the good he does without acknowledging his bigotry why should I let Farrakhan have a different standard.

[tatertop]

39. Roberts bids ill will toward all people

Farrakhan actually has a noble purpose at the heart of it.

[dsc]

41. Wrong on both counts

Robertson has no problem with right wing Christians and I fail to see any noble purpose in Farrakhan's treatment of gays.

[tatertop]

75. perhaps you need to get out more

Roberston hates gays. mmmkay...
Roberston also hates women, the poor, unions, womem, liberals
and so on.
Farrakhan loves Blacks. Blacks need our attention NOW.
I have no idea what you are talking about... do you?

[dsc]

120. You said, and I quote, Robertson hates everyone

and no he doesn't. He loves right wing Christians to site one example. What Blacks need is our respect which means that we treat their leaders just like any other groups leaders. I wouldn't accept anti gay rantings from any other group's leaders why should I accept that from Farrakhan.

[Tomee450]

57. It's nothing but racism

pure and simple. There aren't countless posts about David Duke or David Horrowitz or Charels Murray and Richard Herenstein(authors of the Bell Curve). It just countless attacks on a black man while ignoring the many white bigots out there.

[readmoreoften]

112. Well, not this week.

But I've seen lots of posts about all those crazy-ass people and that shitty Bell Curve book. Frankly, I don't care if Farrakhan is bigoted against whites. I think African-Americans have damn good reason to be skeptical of white Americans. What I don't except is his exclusion of African-American gays.

[are_we_united_yet]

106. I assume

you've forgiven Senator Byrd for his involvent with the KKK?

[cynatnite]

107. His involvement was during his youth...

He admitted it publicly, apologized and hasn't even uttered hateful rhetoric.

Apples and oranges.

[are_we_united_yet]

109. May I ask

How often you listen to LF?

[cynatnite]

110. Sure...

I listened to him at the first million man march and started on this last one before shutting him off.

I've read plenty of his speeches over the years and other things. I'm not one to call a spade a spade lightly.

[are_we_united_yet]

126. In other words rarely.

Really, you can have your opinion about LF as I only care so much how you feel about him. But making sweeping statements about the man based on listening to a few speeches lets me know how much critical thinking you've done to arrive at your opinion.

And while you are criticizing, you might as well offer up a suggestion for another black leader who will be as effective in mobilizing the AA community to address the dire circumstances they face.

[cynatnite]

161. Hmm....I guess the wide range of resources for all his statements...

don't count. :eyes:

Besides, I'll continue criticizing as I see fit. I know plenty of people who don't care for him at all because of these well-published views of his.

[are_we_united_yet]

196. Good for you

[WI_DEM]

40. No he's the Nader of 2001

who was much more despised because he cost Gore the presidency in 2000.

[CatWoman]

50. someone gets it

[Sapphire Blue]

45. Re: Lous Farrakhan... take what you need & leave the rest.

He makes some excellent points which shouldn't be discarded... other points... well...

[dsc]

51. So if I extoll some great thing David Duke says

you would have the same attitude?

[Sapphire Blue]

54. No... but then I don't think Duke could make a good point w/a...

pencil sharpener, let alone his mind or mouth.

[dsc]

58. He is against both NAFTA and the Iraq war

both of which are fairly popular positions here.

[Sapphire Blue]

60. So you're extolling the virtues of David Duke?

Interesting... how do you know so much about Duke?

If you want to slam Minister Farrakhan, no one can stop you. If you want to criticize or defend anyone else, you're free to do so... but don't expect everyone else to share your opinions.

[dsc]

119. No but my point is that

most people meet the standard you are applying to Farrakhan, that is most people say some things which are right from time to time. Evidently you don't think that your Farrakhan standard should apply to Duke, I wonder why the difference. From the perspective of a gay person or a Jew it is pretty hard to tell the difference between those two people.

[Sapphire Blue]

147. Good God, are you seriously equating Minister Farrakhan w/the KKK???

You wonder why the difference??? Please read some history.

I will stand by my earlier position (which you've dubbed my "Farrakhan standard") that Minister Farrakhan's message has some value... which doesn't mean that I agree w/him 100%. I wouldn't compare Minister Farrakhan's message w/what Duke agrees with... I would compare Minister Farrakhan's message w/Duke's message. There is a world of difference.

[Tomee450]

156. Sapphire Blue

it's been very eye opening. Wild hysterics over one man. Unbelievable. Post after post attacking a black man for doing something he believes will help the poor and minorities. It's rally been something to see.

[Sapphire Blue]

170. Yes, it has been eye opening.

What I see so much of is rejection & resentment of Minister Farrakhan & his message because 100% of his message may not be inclusive of every human group. Whether or not his message is inclusive of all, his message does not call for the elimination of those for whom he does not advocate. He does not call for oppression of one group to advance another group.

There appears to be much defensiveness in this thread on the part of those who exhibit this rejection & resentment of Minister Farrakhan & his message. Why so much defensiveness if one’s conscience is clear?

Edited to add:I would also say that I've observed what appear to be borderline, if not outright racist attitudes in this thread. For those who wonder who I'm referring to... if the shoe fits... well, you know what to do w/it & your attitudes... and for those w/a clear conscience, the shoe won't fit.

[Tomee450]

183. Exactly!

"I would also say that I've observed what appear to be borderline, if not outright racist attitudes in this thread."

I agree completely. It's been very revealing and disappointing. One would not expect to find such attitudes among progressives.

[Sapphire Blue]

190. I wonder why there is so much concern over the idea that ...

... (when whites feel left out) Minister Farrakhan may not be advocating for all groups, while, in other cases (not involving Minister Farrakhan), there is not the same level of concern when the poor, blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, Arabs, and immigrants are consistently left out and/or taken for granted (Edited to add: ) ... say, for instance, by the Democratic Party. Where is the outcry for inclusiveness there? God forbid that those typically on the top should ever get slighted.... let alone live in such a manner for generations.

[dsc]

195. He called Judism a gutter religion

and gays a disease caused by the white man. If he simply left out gays and Jews no one would care. MLK didn't have a lot to say on either subject to site one example of someone who I think is a great leader. Farrakhan far from leaving out gays and Jews seems nearly obsessed with Jews and seems to care about gays too. I am frankly sick to death of hearing excuses for Farrakhan in this regard. He and David Duke have the exact, precise, same opinion of gays and Jews and both would be treated exactly and precisely the same under a regime headed by either one.

[dsc]

197. I am equating him with David Duke

who isn't the whole KKK. I can't see a whit of difference between Duke's and Farrakhan's views on gays and Jews. Both hate both classes of people. Both would, if given the power, exterminate both classes of people.

[oasis]

62. I've seen numerous positive threads on Pat Buchannan over the past

several years. Most DUers agreed to the points made by Buchannan,(opposition to Bush on the war, PNAC etc.. Posters made comments on the various threads, some bashed Buchannan's politics and that was that. No DUer was accused of carrying water for Pat Buchannan or of anticipating a jump to the Republican Party.

So Farakkan hosts a huge event for the benefit of black and poor folk, makes a few points that most DUers agree with,and all hell breaks loose.

Mmmmmmmkay.:eyes:

[CatWoman]

63. I bow to you, Oasis

I bow to you.

Thank you for the most thoughtful, beautiful post of the month.

[oasis]

64. Just tellin' it like it is.

Thanks for standing up to the busy bodies. :hi:

[NoSheep]

92. that cat must be digitally enhanced!

[greyl]

104. It's a painting. :) nt

[Inland]

68. True, mostly in the vein of, "even nutty Pat hates Bush."

Nobody ever defended him as a leader of liberals and democrats. Nobody was accused of carrying water for Pat because nobody did. Yet, Farrakhan is defended as a person, as a leader, and in fact, his more goofy and downright pernicious beliefs are excused.

I say sort of the same about Farrakhan as I do about Pat. He's right on some things, and people enjoy hearing him bash Bush, but he's still coming from a really different place than liberal democrats. He isn't a liberal democrat any more than Pat. Like Pat, he's not on the common liberal conservative axis.

[Tomee450]

85. You call it

defense;I call it pointing out hypocrisy. Pat Buchanan is a national figure with a following. Didn't he run for president? He is a man who appears not to like Jews and Blacks yet there are people here who are willing to forget his failings and give him a pat on the back for his criticism of this administration. Farrakhan is not a national black leader. He is though, an outspoken critic of racism. You and others are unwilling to treat him as you treat others who are considered bigots. You are willing to give the Buchanan's of the world a pass for their history but will continue to hound black leaders who offend. That's what bothers me; the glaring double standard. Mosts of the prominent bigots are not black, yet it is the blacks who are constantly castigated, even if they may have changed. Where is the fairness in that?

[Inland]

86. WTF are you talking about?

Who gives the Buchanans a pass? The point of my post is that nobody carries water for him, that nobody declares him a liberal leader because he despises Bush. Why? Because he ISN'T.

Say that Farakhan isn't a liberal, and shouldn't be a leader of liberals, is "hounding".

There's no double standard. It's just that liberals aren't going to follow Farakhan because he isn't one. He's a black nationalist.

[Tomee450]

89. I think I made myself pretty

clear. There is a double standard. We can agree to disagree.

[Inland]

122. Well, there is a double standard.

I just can't figure out why you insist on using one. Why is Farrakhan simply beyond the same standards one would apply to anyone else?

[Tomee450]

158. Oh please

you know better. Pat Buchanan and other bigots are allowed on the public airwaves on a regular basis. Do you really expect us to believe that Farrakhan would ever be permitted to do so? A black man who offends is condemned forever. The dishonesty in some of the posting is simply astounding. As someone stated, Bill Bennett is still on the air and will continue to be. You think if Farrakhan called for the genocide of Jewish babies he would continue to have a show? We both know the answer to that. There is a double standard and honest people would admit it.

I have no problem with anyone criticizing Farrakhan or any other black person. What I have problem with is that their infraction is never forgotten. They cannot get on with their lives. They are constantly reminded of what they did in the past. I see Jewish people being quite friendly with Pat Buchanan showing no dislike whatsoever but when it comes to the black man,Farrakhan, well that is a different story. If you cannot understand that black people can see the difference, then you really do believe that they lack intelligence.

[oasis]

88. I read no post that claimed Farrakkan was a "liberal Democrat". He

doesn't try to pass himself off as one. As far a LF being "defended" as a "person" and as a "leader", he is both.

He's not running for office and there will never be a groundswell of support for the man here on DU. But posters will still persist in telling others what to think about him.

[Inland]

125. Exactly why he SHOULD be treated like Pat Buchanan.

So why isn't he?

Pat's a person, and a leader. Pat's not a liberal democrat. Pat's not passing himself off as one. Pat's not running for office. Pat's not getting a groundswell of support, nor should he.

And when Pat Buchanan gets it right on an issue, all he gets is, "even nutty old Pat thinks we should withdraw from Iraq".

I don't understand why Farrakhan would get a different treatment, since he too isn't a liberal democrat. Last I knew, NOT being a liberal democrat wasn't a reason for nobody to comment on a liberal democratic site.

[oasis]

136. DU is an unlikely place for either to recruit converts. I'll just leave it

at that.

[Inland]

140. *sigh* Because we are all liberals or democrats, there isn't conversion.

Farrakhan is neither. That's not exactly a fact that requires a massive reexamination of conscience to acknowledge.

Yet, it can't be done. It just can't.

[oasis]

146. *sigh* There is no danger of DUers being converted to Islam or GOPism

after reading a few positive posts about Buchannan or Farrakkan.

That's my point.

[Inland]

179. And no danger in negative posts, either, when meritorious.

At least, when Buchanan is at issue. Everyone seems agreed on that.

[Tomee450]

69. Thank you.

I was thinking along the same lines. Pat Buchanan is on television every week, often sitting across the table from Jews and other whites who are quite cordial to him. His history of bigotry is forgotten and he is commended on his comments about the Bush administration. At one time, he even had his own show. How different from the treatment of Farrakhan. His alleged offenses can never be forgiven, even if he is trying to do good. And it is demanded of black folks that they totally reject him because of his comments even as those making such demand fail to reject people like Buchanan, Charles Murray and David Horowitz. Horowitz, too, is often on television and C-Span earlier this year gave three hours to Charles Murray who deeply believes in the inferiority of black people. Where was the outrage? I don't recall seeing many threads discussing Murray.

[oasis]

83. This is my gripe. They can bash Farrakan as much as they please

according to the facts. But their arrogance becomes annoying when they insist on telling others HOW THEY MUST THINK. They characterize anyone with anything positive to say about LF as having overdosed on the Kool Aid.

To them I say, "I gotcha Koolaid".

[LittleClarkie]

71. No, he's the 2005 Pat Buchannan

Don't you think?

[ulysses]

81. no. he's probably what we deserve, though.

I'm no great fan of the man, but nature abhors a vacuum. There are lots of reasons he gets a hearing in the neighborhood where I teach.

[RagingInMiami]

115. If LF is the 2005 RN

Then that means that a stronger, more charismatic, personality has not emerged to voice the same ideas and stand for the same values that LK and RN stand for.

In other words, LF is no MLK and RN is no FDR.

And I'm not trying to knock them off their pedestal. I'm just waiting for a true revolutionary personality (and I don't violence) to emerge from the crap that we've endured these last few years, as well as the last few decades.

It's time for some serious change. And it's going to take a very charismatic, smart and progressive person to lead the way.

[donheld]

118. You are trying to save the pedestal for someone who deserves it.

Your quite right Mr Nader and Minister Farrakhan are not the ones for it. God do we ever need our FDR/MLK to step up.

[NobleCynic]

117. ....NO

You're kidding right? Nader may be stubborn to the point of idiocy, but at least he's honest.

[JI7]

121. he is mostly an issue on DU and other similar type places

he isn't very popular even among blacks and muslims and other minorities. he is mostly something that that people like to discuss on political forums.

but he isn't very influential.

Ralph Nader had(has) more influence than Farrakhan.

[H2O Man]

128. Years ago

in one of a series of four interviews I did with Onondaga Chief Paul Waterman, I asked him why traditional societies do not share the fascination that American culture has with the past misdeeds of its "leaders." This was at a time when the republicans were freaking out because Bill Clinton had admitted to smoking pot thirty years in the past. I think that it is worth noting that, in general, the black community did not judge Clinton as harshly for his human weaknesses while president, as did the white community. Anyhow, I asked Paul if past mistakes matter?

He reponded, "People grow up, and change. Remember that the first Tadodaho was the meanest man on earth, until the song of the birds changed him. He became a great leader.

"So we respect change. We forget the bad. Maybe if I did think of their past, I would say that the first Tadodaho had to be so bad, in order to become so good for his people."

I'm not sure that there is benefit in the on-going debate about Louis Farrakhan. It might be worth shifting the discussion a little bit, to examine concepts such as human growth and redemption.

[Inland]

131. Happy for human growth and redemption.

But there can't be any redemption without acknowledgement of error. That's what makes Clinton and Byrd different from Lott and Bush and the dead peckerhead from South Carolina.

It would be as if the chief wouldn't acknowledge the Tadodaho as mean. Or said that other people were meaner. Or that it really doesn't matter anyway, it being a long time ago.

Furthermore, the issue of personal growth of Rev Farrakhan is still open. He seems to have, after his near death illness, mellowed. But I think he is a black nationalist still and that is antithetical to the liberal democratic views I hold and DUers hold.

[kwassa]

139. I think that you are wrong

Inland:
"But I think he is a black nationalist still and that is antithetical to the liberal democratic views I hold and DUers hold."

This strenuous argument taking place here displays the variance in values and views here at DU.

We are not a monolith, either. As you can see, Farrakhan does have value for many of the black posters here. They see something that you don't, and this does not make them any less Democratic.

[Inland]

143. I think that's wrong.

I'm sure Farrakhan does have value for some black posters, having heard from several, but I think that the value is overstated because it requires ignoring, explaining or minimizing much of what he is about that is NOT democratic or liberal.

I had a number of conversations in a thread where the OP said that the NOI creation myth of whites being created by mad scientists was no more goofy than any other religious belief. My point, that while it was no more goofy, it was also racist, got a) statements that Farrakhan never acted on racism b) declarations that other religions were worse c) statements that Farrakhan doesn't matter anyway, being a minor figure. Each response simply explained away or minimized it. I didn't raise the subject, either.

And I do think that black nationalism is fundamentally inconsistent with liberalism, much as the aryan race whtie supremacits are fundamentally inconsistent with liberalism. Both seek a separate polity and culture system, separate, that is, from each other's respective races. That's fine, if there are two separate countries to go to. It isn't right for America and the ideals of inclusion and participation by individuals without regard to race, religious or other communal identity. It's not our ideals.

[kwassa]

148. Black nationalism is a canard

because hell will freeze over long before it happens. Reparations are more likely, and we all know how soon that will happen. Black nationalism has very little support among black Americans, because no one needs or wants it. It was barely viable as a political idea a couple of times in our history, but never had much support. As an objection to Farrakhan, this is a minor issue.

I haven't followed Farrakhan closely, recently, and I did watch all the coverage from the Million Man March ten years ago, live. This is his big hit, this March, because aside from this he has relatively little influence in the daily lives of black Americans. The membership of the NOI is something like 15,000 in a country of 35 million African-Americans. What he does do is to put some issues on the table like nobody else can, particularly the issue of self-reliance and responsibility, which has been the NOI's chief call since their inception, and especially since the 1960s. This is the strong point of your message.

[goclark]

137. H2O Man ~ Bravo for your post!

I want to learn more about Tadodaho!

For those that don't know it, LF has being extremely ill with Cancer.
The African American community was well aware of it and your post reminded me of that issue.

I was shocked to see him at the March,walking down the steps with the aid of his wife, in what appeared to be vibrant spirit.

Many times events happen in our lives that help us to grow.
Seems to me it's not the Happy times that make me a better person, it is the Trying Times that changed me for the better.


I don't know anything about LF's private life.
I was not there for his pain and sleepless nights.

But I do know something about pain and suffering.

Human Growth and Redemption should be an excellent topic!

Maybe we can all share our life changing moments.

Please start a thread and email me when you do.
I am open to Listening and Learning and Growing.

[Inland]

144. By the way, one might compare creation myths.

The native american myth has a theme of redemption.

the NOI myth has whites invented by mad scientists, and has a theme of separation and racialism.

Just saying.

[KG]

129. appearently so.

[McCamy Taylor]

132. No. He cant peel enough votes to matter. Jackson could. He wont run.

[Neecy]

142. Wow

I haven't gone into any of the Farrakhan threads, and I'm surprised by the animosity.

No, I don't agree with everything he says - and I don't have to. It's all about representation and giving people a voice and that's what he does. You know how powerless many here have felt since the Bush administration - imagine feeling that your entire life. He represents someting that we might not understand or agree with, but certainly he has every right to speak on behalf of those who DO agree with him. More power to him (and yes, I'm gay and can say this - we all have a right to choose our own leaders, and from that perhaps we can work for some kind of greater understanding and tolerance. We're in the same shitty boat together).

[goclark]

152. Wonderful thoughts! We are all in the same boat

We are all in the boat that does not include GW and his Crime Family.

We of all people should stick tigether.

We need to stop eating our own. That is playing right into the Republican logic.

[Taverner]

145. Although Farrakhan has been known to be kooky at times

He really is the target of an all out media assasination. Thing is the Nation of Islam has dropped a lot of their hatred over the years, yet the media still continues to paint them as racist.

I don't see people up in arms over the Southern Baptists for being pro-slavery back in the day...

[goclark]

154. He is the target by design and Liberals Need To Wake Up

Remember Dean's Scream?

Recall Kerry's Swift Boat?

Remember Monica's Blue Dress?

The MSM has made us buy into each one of these scenarios.

Remember MLK's girlfriends and he was a "communist?"

Remember McCarthy? Thank you Edward R. Morrow!!!!!

Remember Malcolm X was full of hate and dangerous?

Now Liberals are allowing the MSM to control their beliefs about LF!

It is all by design.
The MSM knows that we will eat up anyone that tries to help the poor and people or color.
And now, they are trying to even hurt the people that are trying to help the Middle Class.

GWB has done a damn good job, with Rove's help, of making the Middle Class included in the same bag as African Americans.

Bring down LF, bring down the poor,people of color, the Middle class and Liberals!

And now we have the Nazi's marching through Ohio!!
Where are the screams about them!?
They are the enemy,not LF.

[NNadir]

160. Farrahkan is a republican? Who knew? What's next?

Appearances on CNN as "consumer activist," as opposed to "failed politician?"

[Nebraska_Liberal]

165. LF

LF is just another bigot, religious extremist. He is divisive to Americans. Unity in America will not come from LF. That is not part of his message. There are many black leaders that can be looked at for a more positive message such as Cornell West, Obama, and others. It is just unfortuneate that they all get grouped together simply because they are black. These people have very different views from each other.

[Ksec]

168. I just dont understand

how some people look past racism in some and then turn around a denounce someone for the same thing.

If a person says racist and demeaning remarks towards a whole race of people then they are racists. Now, if the publicly denouce their past racism in clear concise terms then Ill give them their due. Until then its obvious they still believe what they said before .

A racist is a racist . No exceptions to the rule

[izzybeans]

169. I just wish people who claim he's a biggot would provide some sources

I have trouble meshing that image with what I saw with my own two eyes. I surely can support that, however if the biggot charge holds water than I'd feel like a white guy supporting David Duke just 'cause he donates money to his church.

to those claiming LF is an anti-semite, homophobic, racist, please provide examples with links. I've yet to see one. How do I know there is not some disinfo. campaign otherwise?

[cynatnite]

171. Here's a few links:

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/07/12/farrakhan.case/

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/4222/noi.html

http://archives.thedaily.washington.edu/1995/102595/media.html

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/04/30/britain.farrakhan/

http://www.wej.com.au/adc/current_affairs/louis.html

http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2000/10/17/march/

http://www.thewitness.org/article.php?id=934

If this isn't enough, I'll be glad to supply more.

[izzybeans]

172. Thanks I'll look through them.

[izzybeans]

173. Ok thanks, there were two links that actually had quotes.

I'd been searching for some. Most often people only provide descriptions and no examples. Now if the examples provided in these links would have sources of their own. I'd be totally convinced. I'm going to NexisLexis tomorrow to try to find the speeches cited in thewitness, which seemed most credible in the above listing. Besides the WEJ, which has a hosting cite that provides unattributed quotations, thewitness was the only time I've seen a quote.

The rest of the links above are much of the same name calling without any of the substance. It's not a critique, I'm honestly trying to figure this out, because something is not adding up. I'm troubled most by thewitness.org's analysis it seems pretty solid.

[cynatnite]

174. That's what I found in the first five minutes...

ADL has actual quotes, but many dismiss it because it's the ADL :eyes:

There's plenty of resources out there.

[izzybeans]

176. I guess my question was mostly rhetorical. It seems many on here

were repeating the lines of others without any actual knowledge of the things said. I just don't want to be one of them.

Thanks!

[cynatnite]

178. I can understand that...

I remember Franken accusing Limpballs of pulling information out of his butt. That's always stayed with me and I don't want to be accused of pulling information out of my butt.

So I read and research. Drives my RW mother nuts. :rofl:

[cynatnite]

177. Here's an interesting one about Farrakhan's questionable dealings...

http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/1996/04b.html

[oasis]

192. 1996? That was the year Arianna Huffington was doing her "Strange

Bedfellows" routine will Al Franken. Al, a well known lefty, would be in bed debating the conservative Arianna on the issues of the day.

Time can surely bring about a change.;-)

[goclark]

194. Excellent point,,,love Arianna today!