The further to the left or the right you move, the more your lens on life distorts.

Friday, February 24, 2017

A Trifecta

This weekend, the Democrats will elect someone to head the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The DNC chair is the national voice of the Democrats, setting the agenda and otherwise becoming the face of the opposition party. The two front runners are Tom Perez, a former labor secretary and the establishment candidate, and someone named "Keith Ellison." By championing Ellison, the Dems have achieved a long sought-after trifecta—a true leftist, who is also and person a color, and a Muslim. Impressive.


That couldn't be the Keith Ellison who was a follower of noted anti-Semite and black Supremacist, Louis Farrakan. Nah, 'cause if it was that Ellison, his association with Farrakan, just like Steve Bannon's role as editor of a web site that published a few neo-Nazis, would make Keith Ellison an anti-Semite ... and by association, the entire Democratic party would become ... wait for it ... anti-Semites! After all, that's loosely analogous to the Dem's claims about Bannon, except Bannon's associations are much, much less pronounced.

Besides, that Ellison was a local leader of a Nation of Islam (NOI) chapter. He himself wrote, "In the NOI, if you're not angry in opposition to some group of people (whites, Jews, so-called 'sellout' blacks), you don't have religion." He defended the NOI against accusations that it was anti-Semitic for years.

In a thoroughly researched and detailed article entitled, "Keith Ellison Supported the BDS Movement and Admired Louis Farrakhan. So Why Are Jewish Democrats Supporting Him for Chairman of the DNC?," Jeff Ballabon writes:
Keith Ellison and I were then both 31 years old. He was on record as defending Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism since at least 1989, under the alias of Keith Hakim ... he continued to identify with Farrakhan and work actively for the Nation of Islam for years after [Khalid Abdul] Muhammad’s [anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic] speech.

In 1995, Ellison himself organized a rally featuring Muhammad—still an outspoken racist and anti-Semite—at the University of Minnesota. Muhammad apparently brought his A-game to the rally, promising that “if words were swords, the chests of Jews, gays and whites would be pierced.”

In 1997, Ellison defended a member of the Minneapolis Initiative Against Racism who said that Jews are “the most racist white people.” In his remarks, Ellison also defended America’s most notorious anti-Semite. “She is correct about Minister Farrakhan,” Ellison insisted. “He is not a racist. He is also not an anti-Semite. Minister Farrakhan is a tireless public servant of Black people…”

In fact, Ellison continued to publicly defend Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam through at least the year 2000 ... But in 2006, while running for Congress, Ellison evidently had second thoughts about the usefulness of the main public affiliation he had maintained from his early 20s into at least his late 30s, when, responding to concerns voiced by the Jewish Community Relations Council, he claimed that his only involvement with NOI was during an 18-month period supporting Farrakhan’s October 1995 “Million Man March”; that he was unaware of NOI’s anti-Semitism; and that he himself never held nor espoused anti-Semitic views. Most of that is demonstrably false, the remainder begs skepticism.

Today, Ellison still traffics in libels and lies, but about the Jewish State—a form of anti-Semitic propaganda that, unlike calling Jews “bloodsuckers” or blaming them for the Holocaust, is now socially and politically acceptable on the left. There are rules to this game, of course. Thus, on a trip to Israel in June 2016, Ellison tweeted a photo of a sign, hung on a residential window in Hebron, that labeled Israel being guilty of “apartheid.” Ellison’s comment reinforced the libel.
It just can't be the Keith Ellison Ballabon described, could it? After all, that Keith Ellison is a dishonest opportunist who tells us that his direct and irrefutable associations with rabid anti-Semites were all a misunderstanding (on his part) and that he was "unaware" that his associates said bad things. That's a flat-out lie. That Keith Ellison,—the new left-wing darling—is a bad guy. Democrat Alan Dershowitz writes:
In 2009, Ellison was one of only two dozen Congressmen to vote “present” rather than vote for a non-­‐binding resolution “recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from, reaffirming the United States’ strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-­‐Palestinian peace process.” And in 2010, Ellison co-­‐authored a letter to President Obama, calling on him to pressure Israel into opening the border with Gaza. The letter describes the blockade of the Hamas-­‐controlled Gaza strip as “de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents.”
Surely Jewish Democrats would protest if it was that Keith Ellison, wouldn't they?

Nah, the Dems must have elevated a different Keith Ellison as a serious contender for DNC Chair. Even the most extreme, left-wing Democrats would never allow anyone who had such a close association with an anti-Semitic group and its virulently anti-American, anti-Semitic leaders. Would they?

Even if Ellison does not win the election, the harsh reality that he is a front runner tells us plenty about the current state of the Democratic Party. We'll see how the vote goes.