« | »

Senate To Be Less Diverse With Non-Dems

From the race obsessed Associated Press:

Senate likely to be less diverse after elections

By Deanna Bellandi, Associated Press Writer Fri Feb 5

CHICAGO – That historically all-white club known as the U.S. Senate is likely to lose what little diversity it has after November’s elections.

Two white men will be competing for President Barack Obama’s former seat in Illinois, now held by Roland Burris, the chamber’s lone African-American. Appointed by the scandal-tainted former governor, Burris won’t be seeking a full term.

In contests in Florida, Texas and North Carolina, black candidates face daunting challenges to joining the august body, from difficulty raising cash to lack of name recognition to formidable rivals.

Blacks comprise 12.2 percent of the nation’s population, but you wouldn’t know it in the 100-member Senate. Come next year, the total number could add up to zero.

"It certainly is not a desirable state of affairs," said David Bositis, a senior political analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies.

Bositis noted that blacks don’t make up the majority population in any state and in states where there are large numbers of blacks, as in the South, there are racial divisions that make getting elected difficult.

Florida is more likely to produce the next Hispanic senator than it is the next black senator…

Notice that this article is only talking about the ‘diversity’ of skin color, not the ‘diversity’ of political thought.

In truth, if the Republicans take away more seats from the Democrat super-majority, the Congress will be certainly be more diverse.

But of course in the minds of the Associated Press, the color of one’s skin is far more important than the content of their character.

Indeed, the AP seems to be suggesting that with Senate seats, ‘once you go black you can never go back.’ They also seem to be demanding that we have racial quotas for our elected officials.

And we thought the election of Mr. Obama was going to put all of this nonsense behind us?

(Actually, we never did.)

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, February 5th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

24 Responses to “Senate To Be Less Diverse With Non-Dems”

  1. canary says:

    Quota in sports next?

    • Right of the People says:

      The NBA wouldn’t be worth watching if they install quotas. Somehow watching a bunch of slow, white guys running around would be boring with a capital B.

    • MinnesotaRush says:

      And they can’t jump either! :-)

  2. Helena says:

    “Notice that this article is only talking about the ‘diversity’ of skin color, not the ‘diversity’ of political thought. In truth, if the Republicans take away more seats from the Democrat super-majority, the Congress will be certainly be more diverse.”

    Amen.

    And notice how this article leads off – lamenting that Obama’s former senate seat, now held by appointee Burris, will certainly have a white man in it – because only white candidates are running. If no black candidates are running, how can they win? They don’t scold Burris for not running, and he’d have a good chance, merely because he’s already there and has some name recognition.

    • Petronius says:

      “They don’t scold Burris for not running, and he’d have a good chance, merely because he’s already there and has some name recognition.”

      Exactly. As Woody Allen once said, just showing up is 80 percent of success.

      And Senator Burris is certainly no worse than many of his esteemed colleagues . . . e.g., just to name a few, Chuckie Schumer, Al Franken, Harry “let’s-make-a-deal” Reid, Dick “our-boys-are-Nazis” Durbin, Chris Dodd, Arlen Specter, Barbara “don’t-call-me-ma’am” Boxer, Mary “I-can-be-reached” Landrieu, or Ben “grab-all-you-can-get” Nelson.

      And, like the Roman senator Incitatus, Burris out-lasted the man who appointed him.

      And that gives him one leg up on the rest of the herd (so to speak).

  3. GetBackJack says:

    World Ends Tomorrow … Women and Children Hardest Hit.

    (I know why our Founding Fathers so irritate the Dweebs, because they insisted the only responsible manner of voting was to be carried out by white men with property. Gee … they’re sounding more and more sensible every day)

    • Right of the People says:

      On that subject, imagine if only those who pay taxes would be allowed to vote. Wouldn’t that make a huge difference?

    • proreason says:

      The principle is sound and should be reinstated.

      ROP has it correct.

      No stake, no vote. Minimum Income Tax to vote should be $500 and adjust for inflation. Anybody whose owes less than $500 has the right to pay the $500 in order to vote. If you don’t have the right to vote, you also don’t have the right to serve on juries, or serve in elected or appointed public office.

      The country would be completely different from the moment that amendment passes.

      There is probably nothing else that could have a greater impact on the country, other than a major war.

    • Confucius says:

      I like ROP’s idea.

    • jobeth says:

      Now a days, even idiots can own property. And some even idiots can have enough to pay income taxes.

      How about a test for understanding the workings on the government? You know, why we have three branches of government. Who are Your reps in DC? etc, etc.

      I would venture that a LARGE number of people who voted for Obalmy didn’t have a clue what he stood for. They probably couldn’t have even name the vice pres candidates. etc etc.

      However…they knew who won on American Idol!

    • Perdido says:

      >>”On that subject, imagine if only those who pay taxes would be allowed to vote. Wouldn’t that make a huge difference?”<<

      I imagine there'd be a lot more people paying taxes.

    • Right of the People says:

      Perdido,

      That is the whole idea. Maybe if these idiots who voted for The Won™ in ’08 had a horse in the race they’d think before voting in a tax and spend liberal socialist. When it’s your own money on the line you tend to be a bit pickier.

      JoBeth,

      I never said anything about owning property but you have to be a taxpayer. You’re right, even idiots can and do own property that they didn’t have anything to do with acquiring. Here in the People’s Republic of Vermont, there are people who inherited the family farm/homestead and are on welfare. I’m talking about people who have a non-government supplied (free) income and pay income taxes, not the welfare bunnies. If we limited voting to folks who understood our form of government, we’d be ruled by about 10% of the population under 50. Those over 50 it would be more like 60 to 75%. Public school ain’t what it used to be.

    • JohnMG says:

      …..”On that subject, imagine if only those who pay taxes would be allowed to vote. Wouldn’t that make a huge difference?…..”

      Well, for one thing, half of the Obama cabinet couldn’t make THAT cut.

    • MinnesotaRush says:

      I’m all in favor of a system that lets everybody vote; BUT, those that pay taxes .. their vote counts twice. Veterans and military service personnel in the uniformed Armed Services .. their vote counts 3 times.

      Is there any doubt, the Country’s circumstances would look different!

  4. Rusty Shackleford says:

    The underlying theme here, of course is to paint the picture that government will be an all-white racists club (again). Quite frankly, the whole thing stinks and makes me sick. I, for one, am really, really tired of it.

  5. proreason says:

    Looney “diversity” is the 3rd biggest problem our country has, right behind looney national defense, and looey economic policies…..and looney diversity is largely to blame for the two bigger problems.

    We need competant leaders not a rainbow of idiots.

    The nutty quest for a glorious mosaic is the SOURCE of our problems, not the solution to them.

    • JohnMG says:

      Stand by, pro. Soon you’ll hear something to the effect that if you don’t embrace diversity you must be some sort of racist.

      Most of my political beliefs are depicted that way, but I didn’t realize the multitude of ways a person could be a racist until these progressive solons began to point it out.

    • proreason says:

      They can call me a racist. I don’t care. It’s the same as being called a s**t-head…just an all-purpose pejorative used to denigrate somebody liberals disagree with. I’m way beyond caring what they think.

      Until the entire country adopts the same attitude, we won’t get out of the mess we’re in.

  6. Confucius says:

    Anyone recall Senator Reid’s attempts to bar Senator Burris?

    I do. http://sweetness-light.com/archive/reid-claims-authority-to-block-blago-pick

    If the white Democrat Harry Reid had his way, the Senate would be 100% white–a.k.a. “less diverse.”

  7. joeblough says:

    Are they going to have to change the curtains to match the color scheme?

  8. canary says:

    Obama’s self-describing savior, grandiose, anger & power roots written in Chicago heading in Dreams From My Father by Barack Obama 1994.

    133-134…. Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deed. Change in the congress, compliant and corrupt. Change in the mood of the country, manic and self-absorbed. Change won’t come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots.
    That’s what I’ll do, I’ll organize black folks. At the grass roots. For change.
    And my friends, black and white, would heartily commend me for my ideals before heading toward the post office to mail in their graduate school application.
    I couldn’t really blame them for being skeptical. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, I can construct a certain logic to my decision, show how becoming an organizer was a part of that larger narrative, starting with my father and his father before him, my mother and her parents, my memories of Indonesia with its beggars and farmers and the loss of Lolo to power, on through Ray and Frank, ….. But such recognition came only later.

    141… “So,” Marty said, dabbing the stain with a paper napkin. “Why does somebody from Hawaii want to be an organizer?”
    I sat down and told him a little bit about myself.
    “Hmmph.” He nodded, taking notes on a dog-eared legal pad.
    “You must be angry about something.”
    “What do you mean by that?”
    He shrugged. “I don’t know what exactly. But something. Don’t get me wrong–anger’s a requirement for the job. The only reason anybody decide to become an organizer. Well-adjusted people find a more relaxing work.”

    pg 46….. She looked out the window now and saw that Lolo and I had moved on, the grass flattened where the two of us had been. The sight made her shudder slightly, and she rose to her feet, filled with a sudden panic.
    Power was taking her son…..

    pg 49 “If you want to grow into a human being,” she would say to me, “you’re going to need some values.
    Honesty — Lolo should not have hidden the refrigerator in the storage room when the tax officials came, even if everyone else, including the tax officials, expected such things…
    Fairness — the parents of wealthier student should not give television sets to the teachers during Ramadan,….

    pg 50…. She had only one ally in all this, and that was the distant authority of my father. …He had led his life according to principles that demanded a different kind of toughness, principle that promised a higher form of
    power. ..
    I would follow his example, my mother decided. I had no choice It was in the genes ….

    note Lolo was his muslim/hindu practicing step-father in Indonesia. He was forced to work for military rooting out communism and then on to working for oil business which still angered his mother as she yell, of the white owners,
    ‘they are NOT my people’.
    Obama was closer & bonded with Lolo who was not a good example. She points out Obama has his father’s eyebrows and sends him back to Hawaii to try and salvage his poor morals he was becoming.
    On a visit his mother lectures him on his deepening to a point in which Obama became fearful he was ending up to be a drug addicted junkie.
    He writes he was embracing MalcomX & muslim religion, which continued in the friends he chose. Obama wanted to stay on the island and go to Hawaii University, but his mother was against it, do to his lifestyle. He had chose his grandparents to live with as they let him do what he wanted as long as he didn’t bring his messes home with him. His mother lectured him that with his friend going to prison for drugs, and Obama’s grades dropping, that he would go away for college as he could choose from any college in the nation.
    So, he chose LA Occidental College of Arts and joined theater where he sulked over not getting bigger parts on stage, and continued his partying.

  9. Rip Cord says:

    With unemployment at about 16 to 17 % and the national debt in Trillions wouldn’t less diversity be a lot more? ROFLMAO. If it’s bad for the “minorities eg diversity” then it will be good for the country. Trust me on this David Bostis…………

  10. MinnesotaRush says:

    “By Deanna Bellandi, Associated Press Writer Fri Feb 5

    CHICAGO – That historically all-white club known as the U.S. Senate is likely to lose what little diversity it has after November’s elections.”

    And these folks accuse everyone else of being racists. How’s that saying go .. take the log from your eye so you might se a splinter in others’ .. or sumptin like that.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »