« MDE EXCLUSIVE: MORE EVIDENCE OF ELLISON’S CONNECTION TO THE NATION OF ISLAM? | Home | ATTENTION DEDICATED READERS OF MINNESOTA DEMOCRATS EXPOSED #2 »
MDE REALITY CHECK: LIBERAL BLOGGERS REPEAT THE LIE THAT ELLISON WAS NEVER A MEMBER OF THE NATION OF ISLAM
By Michael B. Brodkorb | October 2, 2006
I think the bloggers behind MN Publius believe if they keep repeating this line people will think it is true:
"Keith was never a member of the Nation of Islam, and has never had anything to do with Louis Farrakhan." MN Publius
But the body of evidence in the public record makes the above statement completely false.
1. Ellison discusses his "affiliation with the Nation of Islam" in an article in Insight News from 1998.
2. Ellison's connection to the Nation of Islam has been previously documented by the Star Tribune and Pioneer Press:
"And before Muhammad spoke, Keith Ellison, a Minneapolis attorney and a member of the Nation of Islam, exhorted them to reach into their pockets to help defray costs of the march." Source: Star Tribune, September 14, 1995
"[Keith] Ellison, a newcomer to DFL politics, is well-known in the black community as the former head of the Legal Rights Center and a supporter of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam." Source: Star Tribune, April 5, 1998
"Ellison has been active in the community, but not within the established DFL party. A member of the Nation of Islam, Ellison was the coordinator of the Minnesota participants in the Million Man March and the subsequent community group that formed." Source: Pioneer Press, June 21, 1998
2. Ellison wrote numerous articles defending Louis Farrakhan. Click here and here. Ellison even wrote that Farrakhan was a "role model":
"Minister Farrakhan is a role model for Black youth; however, he is not an anti-Semite. He is a sincere, tireless and uncompromising advocate of the Black community and other oppressed people and around the world. Despite some of the most relentless negative propaganda anyone has ever faced, most Black people regard him as a role model for youth and increasingly, a central voice for our collective aspirations."
3. Ellison is photographed with Nation of Islam literature in 1998.
It's time for the liberal blogosphere to recognize Ellison's documented affiliation with the Nation of Islam and stop repeating the lie that "Keith was never a member of the Nation of Islam, and has never had anything to do with Louis Farrakhan."
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 27 Comments »
27 Responses to “MDE REALITY CHECK: LIBERAL BLOGGERS REPEAT THE LIE THAT ELLISON WAS NEVER A MEMBER OF THE NATION OF ISLAM”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:12 AM
Yes, it’s plain as day for those of us who haven’t drank the liberal Kool-Aid that Keith Ellison was heavily involved in and supportive of the Nation of Islam. But, alas, the liberal blogosphere has drank the Kool-Aid, and no amount of evidence, however compelling or damning, will convince them otherwise.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:29 AM
What is the point in their denial?
Is it personal?
Are they also closeted members of the Nation?
Are they Muslim?
Polygamists?
Sadists?
Radical Muslims perhaops…?
Their denail in the face of these facts is making them look very unreliable. With such staunch approval, not only denial, but APPROVAL of Ellison and what he stands for with the Nation of Islam and as a supporter of COP KILLERS, smacks loudly of a conspiracy to misrepresent this candidate to the voters for political gain and certainly not to work in the best interest of the public.
Is this lugger-headed denial by MN Publius a serious cause for concerm?
Is their un-erring support of Ellison and the radical terror groups, such as CAIR, for financial gain?
Are they being paid to support Ellison in this electionn?
They cannot be this dense…there has to be another agenda at work here for MN Publius.
Someone needs to tell them that their ‘Emporer has no clothes!”
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:32 AM
“Heavily involved with …”, “affiliated with …”, “marched with …”, “stood on the stage with …”, “apologized for …”, “spoke in favor of …”, etc. can be pedantically said to not be the same as “a member of …”. If the only issue is “membership”, of course they cay say there is nothing wrong, and of course they will continue.
And, again, of course, “membership” is not the issue.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:33 AM
Let’s see …. events that occured over a decade ago and even if remotely true were not illegal nor did they put anyone in physical danger ….
vs.
Republican leadership actively covering up an active pedophile who was targeting teenage pages in the U.S. House.
Which do you think is going to piss off the public more?
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:39 AM
Unfortunately, this includes the Strib. If you get your news from them, it’s clear that Ellison once saw a picture of Farrakhan. Maybe. But he never inhaled.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:39 AM
Can you imagine the pure outrage if Conservative blogs were defending ex-Congressman Foley or Bob Ney?
But guess what. . .
They aren’t.
If there is one thing that Republicans and Democrats should be able to stand together on, it is that association with groups that preach hate is not acceptable.
It gets pretty sickening seeing the Left stand side-by-side in defense of hate, and then pretend that speaking out against hate is somehow racist. I guess that is the way it works in their “up is down” and “right is wrong” world.
What is even more distressing to me, and should be to the electorate, is how blind the main stream media is to this whole story. It shows that they are less ideological than they are just pure partisans.
Pretty sad really.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:59 AM
What has Ellison done that’s illegal? Has Mr. Ellison done anything in the last 5 years that would disqualify him from holding office. If the voters of the 5th district send him to congress, so be it. If he fails to represent them to their satisfaction, he will not serve another term. That’s how it works but this site will not allow the voters of the fifth the assumption of competence. Unless of course, the intention is not to convince the voters of anything but to simply slime Ellison. By playing the “party of Ellison” tune constantly, it becomes considered the truth. Like Goebbles said, “If you repeat a lie enough, it becomes the truth.” That’s why this site is considered such a farce. There is never any mention of the big issues that Ellison and Klobuchar and Rowley and Wetterling and Watz will be wrestling with in Washington after Jan ’07. There is never any mention about how those issues will affect Minnesota specifically. What are the pros and cons of their respective positions? There is a simple reason for this situation. The republicans can’t run on the issues. The neo-con/proto-fascist control over the republican party is intellectually and morally bankrupt. They have no ideas. No programs. Nothing. It’s becoming painfully apparent that their sole reason for being is the retention of power and acquisition of wealth.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:01 AM
Waffle:
Once again you miss the point…on purpose.
It is NOT a decade ago…Ellison is involved NOW.
It is not his PAST…it is his LIFE.
If you take a vacation to LasVegas…are you still, yes STILL, a Minnesotan? YES.
Now tell me why your man Ellison was NEVER arrested for ANY tickets and the WARRANTS issued to an Officer of the Court?
Is he above the law…or…abusing it???
Did laws state that he, in his position, could NOT be arrested?
If so…He is clearly a hideous abuser of the law. An opportunist attempting to disguise himself as the Black Superman of the Minnesota legal system.
Fighting crime at the speed of sound and just way too darned busy to plug meters…cause there was NO penalty for not doing so…because he could not be arrested…and WHY????
Check that out.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:07 AM
Say, Diane? You posted: “…and the radical terror groups, such as CAIR,…”
Boy, that CAIR is one “radical terror group”; ya think? So radical the President would denounce ‘em, ya think?
You would think wrong. Link here for a picture of the President, with a guy from that “radical terror group”…
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:08 AM
Let’s see…
Not defending Mark Foley because his actions are disgraceful, disgusting, and, perhaps, criminal.
vs.
Continually defending a former bigot who, were he a Republican (see Rich Stanek, Trent Lott, et. al.), the same defenders of bigotry would do a complete 180, calling for that Republican’s resignation.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:14 AM
Two Putt Tommy,
That picture is not of Bush with a guy from CAIR, that guy is from the Islamic Center of Washtington D.C…. not the same thing.
BTW… what did Ellison do to disqualify him from being elected congressman… he exersized and continues to exersize extremely poor judgement. He is a racist and an anti-semite. And he deos not reflect Minneosta values.
That should disqualify him from being elected to represent Minnesota in congress.
Unfortunately, the DFL is more obsessed with sending a black man to congress, than actually evalutating his qualifications.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:18 AM
Did anyone hear Amy K on mid morning. Someone asked her about Ellison. She said she didn’t support anyone in the primary, and has a problem with his problems with not obeying the law, given that she is the 5th district chief law enforcer. Clearly, by her tone, she is NOT a fan of Mr. hate group/law breaker, but has to support the ticket
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:25 AM
This probably doesn’t qualify as prophetic since the DFL has become so predictable. This is the text of an article printed last year in the Wright County Republican following the government shutdown:
——————-
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Repetition creates familiarity. Brand managers use repetition constantly to get consumers to accept their products. Repetition can even seem to create reality. Repetition works. Repetition sells. We begin to believe what we focus on. Our minds are very trainable.
But repetition does not change truth. Repetition may disarm an audience and soften their resistance to falsehood. But repetition does not, in fact, change the truth.
The day after the regular session ended, Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson said: “The time for difficult decisions will come. But that time is not here yet.†Dean Johnson said it loudly and he said it clearly. The time for difficult decisions had not yet come. I was outraged by such a ridiculous statement from the head of the Senate.
The time for tough decisions was actually during the regular session. The time for negotiation was between January 4 and May 23 when we were all present, engaged in committee meetings, operating within the regular session, and under the open scrutiny of the press. Not one single media outlet bothered to report the truth behind Johnson’s words. He said-plain as day-that his party was not about to let the session end productively and with any sense of respectful compromise.
Every night news anchors repeat the mantra “Do-nothing legislature†and “Government shutdown.†And every day another constituent sends another nasty email about how stupid and worthless all legislators are and how we should all be thrown out of office for our idiocy. Repetition works. It may not be the truth, but every day the media recklessly sells their woeful product, we lose more trust for our elected officials and the institutions they serve. Remember, peace and productivity do not sell newspapers or garner ratings. Keep the public in a constant state of fear and loathing about our government and the media moguls enjoy the windfall. We are enslaved to their redundant fault-finding criticism. We are daily at risk of buying the gloom and doom that they are selling. Don’t be fooled.
My work as a State Representative was for the most part done when the regular session ended. If you want to see what I did with my colleagues in the House then simply go to the House website and look it up. We got a ton of work done! I am proud of what we accomplished in the House.
As you consume the half-truths put forth by our media, please bear in mind that we are public servants and, contrary to what you hear on the news, most of us work our tails off. Our families make significant sacrifices to support us. I am truly honored and humbled by the opportunity to serve my neighbors and friends. I have no complaints about the job itself, but the facts are what they are. We are a few short weeks away from government shut down. I am as frustrated as anyone that the parties have not resolved the impasse.
At the end of the regular session when the head of the Senate said “The time for difficult decisions will come. But that time is not here yetâ€, with the help of a silent media he quietly declared the beginning of the political theater season. Folks, the lack of a conclusion to the State budget and the impending government shut-down have absolutely nothing to do with what is good for Minnesota. The reason the DFL does not want to cooperate is simply because redundant negative political theatrics generate oodles of marketing spin for next year’s campaign brochures. There is no legitimate reason in my mind that we have not concluded the business of the legislature this year. But there are plenty of illegitimate reasons. Political theater is the reason I find most reprehensible.
The time for difficult decisions has long since past. Our leaders and our media are not only playing with our money, but they are playing with our minds. Be careful how much “activist journalism†you believe just because of the repetition.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:28 AM
Two Bit Tommy:
Ask Mr. Schummer about CAIR. Then ask the FBI.
You need to read more and write less!
I ask, hasa the President met with them since 2001? NO.
They were misrepresenting themselves to the President in a time of crisis.
That mistake has not been repeated by our President Bush.
I didn’t see the President ringing Ellison up for a coffee on his last, or any, visit to Minnesota either! Bush knows better now about those who misrepresent themselves.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:28 AM
I think people are more interested in four Republican leaders of Congress knowingly hiding a pedophile in their midst for more than a year.
And that John Kline has taken huge campaign contributions from all of them, and is responsible for elevating Boehner to his current position.
And Gil Gutknecht bringing Boehner to campaign for him.
Maybe child-protection is a hot enough issue to put Patty Wetterling to office without even worrying about the twisted social agenda of her opponent.
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:31 AM
Funny how you libekooks try to tie Foley to all Republicans. Once someone sees us pulling your tactics of posting on EVERY blog and writing letters to the editor in EVERY newspaper trying to explain away his actions and defend him, let me know.
Until then, Foley is not a Republican, he’s a creep. Is Ellison a Democrat? Or a Creep? Your actions welcome him into your party, while our actions push Foley out of ours. You’re clearly on the same page as Ellison, aren’t you BelgianWaffleTushie?
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:35 AM
Alex,
//the twisted social agenda of her opponent//
Hmm, twisted huh? why do over 70% of our country agree with her on gay marriage then?
She’s only twisted to people who don’t see reality. But I’m sure taking away your food stamps would be tough for you, Alex, so I see your point.
Get a life, a better job (or start a business), start paying 25-30% of every dollar you make to the feds, then come tell me Michelle Bachmann is twisted.
Bachmann-Jeffers for President/VP in 2012!
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:16 PM
This Foley thing….I though Dems liked sexual minorities. Isn’t he blazing new trails like Rosa Parks did? At one time if a white southern Congressman would have had ralations with an African-American, he would have been forced to resign. So how is that different then what Foley did?
{For those not too sharp, the above is satire….poking fun of the left who compare every pet cause to the civil rights movement}
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:46 PM
Yeah, and somehow its outrageous to paint all Democrats with a Pilosi brush…
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:48 PM
Maybe I should remind people that Amy K. never called for a full investigation of my daughter’s molester.
October 2nd, 2006 at 1:24 PM
I honestly think that some liberals who post here know full well that their “points” are real dumb, and somehow think it’s funny or something to express them anyway.
Like “what has Ellison done that’s illegal” – well, of course, we know what he’s done that’s illegal, but as regards the NOI issue under discussion: it would be really hard to come up with a question that was more beside the point.
October 2nd, 2006 at 3:11 PM
Michael-
If Keith Ellison was a member of NOA, but publiclly said that he didn’t support anti-semitism, would you still have a problem with him?
Because in the very Insight news article that you quote in making him a member, he also says:
“For the record, however, I am opposed to the subjugation of any class of person an account of their religion, national origin, race, sex or gender. I reject anti-jewish attitudes from whatever source.â€
I guess I am having a hard time seeing what your point is, but it isn’t that new of a feeling for me.
October 2nd, 2006 at 3:21 PM
RR, I guess it’s like saying I support the KKK but don’t think we should discriminate based on race. Or saying I belong to the ACLU but don’t think we should discriminate against Christians. You can’t support an organization that is based on bigotry and say you don’t support that bigotry.
October 2nd, 2006 at 4:19 PM
I drive past the DFL headquarters every day on my way to work and notice that there is no Keith Ellison sign out front. They have everyone elses but his… hmmmm. Are they embarrassed?
October 2nd, 2006 at 4:49 PM
Sheila –
The DFL Office is in St. Paul. Except for Dean Johnson I don’t think there are any signs out there for non-statewide candidates who are not running in the district/ward/county the office is in.
October 2nd, 2006 at 5:27 PM
The more I read the responses from DFL bloggers and apologists, I get a sense that they are all first rate studends of Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf’s (aka “baghdad bob”) school of Journalism and Ethics.
October 3rd, 2006 at 9:19 AM
Doesnt the homosexual lobby tell us that gays are not pedophiles? (only straight men can be)Why arnt they holding rallys to support Rep. Foley? I guess if you are a gay Dem its ok but not a Gay Republican. I predict there will be alot more senators with skeletons in their closet that will come to light shortly.