Members of the Legislative Black Caucus, circa 2009.
On a previous thread, we got into the whole why-can’t-there-be-whites-only-organizations-when-there-are-blacks-only-organizations thing (get enough white guys together, and this will eventually come up — you know how those people are), with the Legislative Black Caucus being mentioned, as per usual.
Which reminds me…
Last time we had such a discussion, I got an enlightening DM from Bakari Sellers. Our conversation follows:
Huh. “She paid her dues and asked.” Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar.
By the way, here’s evidence, if you need it.
Cathy Harvin, for those who don’t recall, was elected to the SC House in 2005 in a special election to replace her late husband, Alex. She served for five years until her own death, at the age of 56, from breast cancer.
To my knowledge, the caucus does not currently have any white members.
Related Posts
O.K. Brad, you win. You proved me wrong, congratulations. Satisfied? And for the record, I posed the question as to why it is o.k. for blacks to have a caucus or an organization that had black members only and were not criticized. So, I guess when I was sitting around with “all of my white buddies”, we (you know how those people are) by our very nature asked the question.
“I posed the question as to why it is o.k. for blacks to have a caucus or an organization that had black members only and were not criticized”
Black-only groups are routinely criticized by white folks. I seldom hear of a black-oriented group without shortly thereafter hearing, “What would happen f there was a ‘white only’ group of the same nature?”
And why is it not a legitimate question? Please, tell me why it is not?
Your original question asked why black-only groups are NOT criticized. They ARE criticized–all the time. “Why can’t WE do that?” just sounds like whining.
Also, a long history of blacks being excluded from anything that mattered, legally and in fact, and still a chronic under-representation of blacks in positions of power.
But you knew that…
I don’t think that’s the case in Columbia/Richland County any more. I think Blacks, if anything, are over-represented in positions of power, in proportion to their share of the population.
Yes, at the pitiful county level. At the city level, Steve Benjamin has black skin, but hardly seems concerned with typically black concerns–he ther reverse of Bill Clinton (“the first black President”)….
In a state that is 40% black, you would expect a lot more blacks in higher offices. But then again, in a country where women are more than 50% of the population…
Fewer women run for office. Because fewer women are crazy enough to want to.
As I’ve written before, women are more likely than men to be actual grownups. And the childish game that the parties have turned our elections into holds little attraction for them, just as it does for the better class of men. Which is why better people of either gender don’t run…
What are “typical black concerns” in the city of Columbia that Benjamin isn’t concerned about?
Related to nothing, huge win for the state with the SC Supreme Court’s decision to protect process over party.
Too bad Alan Wilson popped an egg on this issue. He is still a work in progress… I hope he was all show and no go advocating for the Elections Commission – but I see no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt on this at this time. I would like to be wrong, however.
Marl Tewart –
You confirm mt WORST suspicians about your PARTISAN BENT! What is CORRUPT about this decision?
“The state Elections CommissionThursday that Republicans could hold a primary after Election Day to find a new nominee. Commission members voted unanimously that Harrell was disqualified from the race, which opened the door for a special election. Harrell resigned and agreed not to seek office for three years as part of a guilty plea agreement last week on campaign-finance charges.”
“Lawyers [SC Suprene Court) Appointed BY LAWYERS] RULED”?
Damn, man! This is as corrupt as it ever gets. The thinking public will soon see right through the concentration of authority in the hands of one, CONDESCENDING profession (statewide and NATIONALLY). – the OVERRATED members of the BAR!
You are on record for dull complacency. I cannot put it any friendlier terms. Try to think outside of your enabling box.
What point are you trying to make by mangling the commentator’s name?
the perils of typing while not a LAWYER!
The gall of it–judges who are actually lawyers! appointed by lawyers who have the audacity to think they can judge fitness to adjudicate!
Good thing I am not an attorney; I might have really flipped his lid.
No one who knows me would be surprised to hear that I have been a registered Republican since age 18. However, I don’t vote by party affiliation – and I certainly don’t listen to a thing operatives for either party say. If someone wants to label me as something, it should be as an active participant in a civil society.
Don’t get your jimmies rustled.
http://bit.ly/1qmercy
Juan, I hate to break it to you, but the South Carolina bar exam results were announced on Halloween. 344 people passed, so watch out. There’s that many MORE lawyers out there now.
🙂
minus those who keep dying, retiring or getting suspended….
I recall this discussion related to the Cogessional Black Cascus not admitting white liberals – not the LBC
Edit- Congressional
Some of the wisest individuals I know are attorneys.
Those dawg gone Samaritians again. Can’t they just stay in their place (caucus) and leave us Israelites alone.
Guys, I’m sorry I missed the word “congressional.” But wouldn’t you say the same principle is at work?
In any case, it reminded me of this interesting fact that I had been meaning to share since Bakari told me about it…
Not even close.
Not when there is an example of a white person being excluded from the Congressional Black Caucus because of the color of his skin.
The Legislative Black Caucus…You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. http://youtu.be/0znNiN0lYAQ