Friday, March 31, 2006

Jonah Goldberg on the Congressional Black Caucus

from National Review Online.

commentary follows.

I case you haven't read about it yet; the Congressional Black Caucus doesn't really represent Black people in the US. In the world of 'diversity' where people need to be proportionally represented in regards to color and ethnicity, people's viewpoints and opinions are nearly always left misrepresented. And in politics, that is what really matters; who cares if you have a perfect representation visually of the minorities of the US in congress if they all think alike? Don't think it could happen? Just let them be in Washington for awhile.

end commentary.

I jumped on Protein Wisdom (Jeff Goldstein's blog) and grabbed a few links:

How foreign policy strategists have fallen into D.C. Groupthink here...

How our education system is failing (particulary terribly in the inner cities.)

Coming from Nat'l Review:

Deroy Murdock is optimistic about the future of Black Americans...

Earlier, Deroy was less optimistic; in particular about Black politicians...

Last year, Jay Nordlinger had some ill words for diversity-think:

More on the above story, Micheal Steele and J.C. Watts demanded an apology...

Rich Lowry on Katrina and the racial politics involved, among other things...

From the 'net: reports on some congress foibles & name calling. on CBC's opposition to Alito... Black Activists Criticise CBC's opposition to Alito...

Recalling 2004, the CBC reprimanded Harry Reid for comments about Clarence Thomas... (newsmax) views that 7 CBC (as of last sept.) are 'derelict' -- that is -- they are too conservative.

commentary follows.

The last link was very telling to me; makes a bold assumption that 100% of Black Americans are represented by particular issues; they do a good job of spouting a lot of bills but do not explain why any of them are helpful to Blacks. Also, what good is the CBC if it is helping Blacks at the expense of everyone else? We aren't given any facts as to why each individual bill is good or bad. To me, it looks like the Monitor is simply a litmus test for Black politicians very similar to the Roe-v-Wade litmus test that Democrats place on judicial nominees.

Perhaps things such as the CBC Monitor which claim to have Black Americans' best interests at heart but are using it as a cover for a liberal agenda are the reason that the CBC is having so many problems properly representing the views of their constituents. After all, are ALL of Barack Obama's constituents black?

It must be hard to tell what Black Americans want when you have two sides shouting the exact opposite things.



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home