« MDE IN THE NEWS: ROLL CALL: ELLISON MAY BE IN SOME TROUBLE | Home | MN GOP: DFL DEFINITION OF “SCRUBBINGâ€: 72 REFERENCES »
FLIP-FLOP: ELLISON NOW DISMISSES ALLEGATIONS ABOUT HIS PAST
By Michael B. Brodkorb | June 27, 2006
Last month, Keith Ellison was so concerned the reaction to his past associations anti-Semitic people, that he sent a letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council.
But now Ellison is calling concerns these concerns "meaningless":
"Ellison said he is increasingly frustrated about the extent to which the allegations about his past have distracted attention from the substance of his campaign.
Ellison dismissed the allegations as 'not legitimate' and 'meaningless.'" Source: Roll Call, June 27, 2006
Tags: Keith Ellison
Topics: Keith Ellison | 11 Comments »
11 Responses to “FLIP-FLOP: ELLISON NOW DISMISSES ALLEGATIONS ABOUT HIS PAST”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
June 27th, 2006 at 11:19 AM
“Meanlingless”
This is exactly why I call Democrats evil. The idea that an endorsed candidate for a federal position can call a longterm relationship with a known racist, white and jew-hating bigot like Farahkan “meaningless” (and that his fellow DFL’ers would agree) demonstrates why they deserve the name.
I go back to my old example of a republican just walking through a KKK meeting 30 years ago. You know DFL’ers would run him out of town today if it were known anyone in the R camp had done that. But for DFL’ers, participating, working with and on the behalf of this group, is “meaningless” and something to be forgotten. He’s “grown”, you know.
No, he’s covering up his true beliefs. Listen to the man and you can hear his hate and anger within him today. His words have “grown” but his heart hasn’t. He’s the same guy, different words.
June 27th, 2006 at 12:05 PM
With all of your professed concern about flip-flops and makeovers, Michael, surely you’ll be noting Makeover Mark Kennedy’s scrubbing of all things Bush from his website:
http://tinyurl.com/qv6nr
June 27th, 2006 at 12:07 PM
Here’s an interesting article on Ellison from altmuslim (check out the links embedded and read the comments section below):
http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1716_0_26_0_C
June 27th, 2006 at 12:27 PM
Wait a minute– can you Evil Democratz prove that Keith Ellison ever met, corresponded with or thought dreamily about Louis Farrahkan?
Because really, thats where the bullshit stops. A long term relationship? What did they exchange commitment rings? Was there talk of a marriage?
Oh… wait, thats right, he never met him… ever.
Sean
June 27th, 2006 at 1:33 PM
Wow. Four comments and nothing from Roving Reporter?
What gives?
June 27th, 2006 at 1:42 PM
So having met the guy is the standard now, eh?
Let’s forget all the documentation Michael has provided here of the clown cooperating with him, touting the Nation line. Apparently those things don’t matter unless he’s met him.
Riiiight.
Belittle the messenger, I can handle it. But we ALL know that while you’re smeaing the messenger Ellison was a Nation of Islam guy (and having met him has nothing to do with it). Facts are facts.
June 27th, 2006 at 1:45 PM
Not true, Dwight. There are still lots of mentions of Bush and photographs of the man. Too bad you didn’t actually visit the site.
June 27th, 2006 at 3:03 PM
Hey Dwight
If elected, Kennedy would serve until 2013.
Bush last term would end in 2009.
DO THE MATH!
June 27th, 2006 at 3:33 PM
There is no ‘towing the line’ of the Nation of Islam EvilD. Keith belongs to a liberal Mosque that is known for it outreach to synogouges (hard word to spell) and joint community efforts with the Jewish community. It’s why their leadership supports Keith. As a matter of fact, the Nation of Islam views Keith’s Mosque as selling out. Outcasts. He joined that Mosque long before he ran for office (and lost the first two times), so it wasn’t a political move.
He HAS rebuked Farrahkan before he was elected and now yet again.
His community and legislative record is far from that of a hatemonger or racist. What proof do you have that he is? Is liberal as all get out? Hell yes, always has been. That’s your real problem with Keith.
June 27th, 2006 at 4:57 PM
“What proof do you have that he is?”
He’s “inclusive” except when you don’t agree with him. He’s for “unity” except when you hold a position different from his. And, he’s been a long time Nation supporter as documented by MDE.
My problem with Ellison is that he has lied about his involvement with the Nation of Islam. He’s tried to minimize it to 18 months and has called it “meaningless”. In reality he was part of it for a very long time and being part of a group like that means you have to support it. You can’t be part of a group like that without holding at least most of its beliefs.
June 28th, 2006 at 9:47 AM
Your proof is what MDE wrote?
As I have pointed out, MDE has only used guilt by association. As you are.
How long was he with them? 20 months? 20 years?