ThoughtsTHOUGHTS ON THE SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 PRIMARY ELECTION The September 12, 2006 Democratic Primary was a masquerade carried out by the Democratic Party machine in collusion with the mass media. The nominating and electoral processes were rigged so that no independent candidates who represented the people's interests could have a fair chance of getting elected. The issues of paramount interest to minority communities were deliberately submerged (the Atlantic Yards development proposal, the war in Iraq, minimum wage, single-payer universal health care, repeal of the Bush tax cuts, the export of jobs, immigration, the impeachment of President Bush),and the machine candidates were careful not to call attention to them. There was only one truly independent and progressive Black candidate running in the primaries who a had a chance to win -- Chris Owens in Brooklyn's 11th Congressional District. He had three opponents, two Black and one white, who were backed by different factions of the corrupt Democratic Party machine: The white candidate was David Yassky, an incumbent City Councilman representing a Councilmanic District adjacent to the 11th Congressional District. Yassky was sponsored by both Democratic senior Senator from New York Charles Schumer and Mayor Michael Bloomberg as part of an ongoing bipartisan campaign to neutralize Black political power. He was funded with well over a million dollars and had access to as much more as he needed. State Senator Carl Andrews, a close associate of Clarence Norman, the former Democratic Party boss of Brooklyn who was recently convicted of multiple felonies. Andrews has always been a machine-owned political hack. He spent over a million dollars on a lackluster campaign. He was endorsed by all of the Black "progressive" political celebrities such as Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Herbert Daughtry, as well as by the machine Democrats led by Charles Rangel, Al Vann, David Patterson and David Dinkins. By contrast, Chris Owens, who was by far the best qualified candidate and the only truly progressive and independent politician in the race, was cynically abandoned by the entire "progressive" political establishment of New York City. This corrupt gang of political opportunists repeated its craven betrayal of Fernando Ferrer's Mayoral campaign of a year earlier. Owens, left to his devices, was still able to raise $380,000, which was enough to win a one-on-one contest against David Yassky. However, against an array of three machine candidates who commanded a combined three million to four million dollars, he faced enormous odds. Even so, he would have had a good chance to win if the Working Families Party had provided him with a second line to run on, and Local 1199 had backed him with its formidable campaign machinery. Instead, the Working Families Party not only denied Owens their line to run on, as they had with Ferrer, but also refused even to endorse him. The WFP remained formally "neutral," but let it be known informally that it would provide its line for Yvette Clarke to run on if she lost the Democratic primary. For its part, Local 1199 threw the full weight of its campaign machinery behind Clarke. Facing these impossible odds, Chris Owens nevertheless received about 10,000 votes out of the approximately 48,000 total. Although he came in fourth, there was only a 5,000-vote gap between Yvette Clarke's winning total of 15,000 votes. (David Yassky received 12,500 votes, and Carl Andrews received 11,000.) Thus, if Owens had been able to take away just 1,500 votes from each of his opponents, he would have edged out Yvette Clarke by 14,500 votes to 13,500. For me, the lesson is that for independent congressional candidates to win, they have to have an independent support base that can raise at least one million dollars in campaign funds, and can mobilize at least one thousand dedicated volunteer workers. Such a truly independent campaign "machine" for 2008 can only be assembled if we begin organizing now on a city-wide basis with clearly defined goals. I say, "Let's get on with it.!"
Don't daydream bro.
reply | email this comment
I wish Room 8 was like Survivor so we could vote you out. All but one of your posts have been praising Chris Owens and all but hailing him as the next coming of the messiah, and the other was a disgusting column with sweeping, grossly racist generalizations and without an iota of facts about Condoleeza Rice. I sincerely hope this really isn't Paul Robeson, Jr. If it is, you are disgracing your father's name. Paul neither J.P. nor Rock has a clue to what their talking about. Chris was by far the best candidate, especially for his courageous stance against the Atlantic Yards proposal and it's use of emeinent domain to try and destroy four Brooklyn neighborhoods. I was in the trences and saw what losers the rest of the pack was. Yassky supported by developers, Andrews a complete idiot who can't speak English and a liar in Yvette Clark. Paul keep up the great work. The one constant in Mr. Robesons writing is that all the candidates names except for Chris have been recycled from Race to race and those supporting each candidate can at one time be found in bed with any of the thers. Shouldnt more people be insulted by the paucity of choice in these eelctions? Why are the same people vying for the different musical chairs and once the music stops seem to find a new records and new chairs. How about cleaning up shop and getting rid of the whole slate of sorry candidates. Can anyone explain The al Van/Robinson switcheroo and Diane Gordon? Sorry examples really. How bad can you be. We all know Owens was running on his fathers coattails. T hat was his only hope. Could not you see this?? Any other proposition is sheer fantasy. Get Real, if you wan som credibility here!!!
Shares in Coach Store OnlineSamsung Electronics Co Ltd rose moreCoach Outletthan 2 percent on Monday after Apple Inc'sLouis Vuitton Pursesbid to halt U.S. sales of its GalaxyCoach Handbagsline of products was rejected, easing concernCoach Bagsof slowing growth in its telecom business,Chanel Storewhich generates revenue of $13Coach Outlet Store Onlinebillion per quarter. The U.S.Coach Outlet Onlinecourt ruling deprived the iPhoneLouis Vuitton Pursesand iPad maker of crucial leverage inChanel Baga global patent battle betweenCoach Outlet Onlinethe two companies, and paved theChanel Storeway for Samsung to sustain itsCoach Factory Onlinestrong smarpthone sales momentum.Louis Vuitton BagsThe two companies are lockedChanel Pursein a bruising legal battle that includesChanel Pursesmore than 20 cases in 10 countries,Coach Factory Outletbut none of them carries moreCoach Outlet Onlinesignificance than the U.S. case,Coach Fatory Outlet Storeas it is the most importantCoach Outlet Onlinemarket for Samsung. SamsungCoach Factory Onlinesurpassed Apple as the world's top smartphone maker in the third quarterCoach Factory Outletand a ruling to temporarily haltLouis Vuitton StoreU.S. sales of Galaxy smartphonesCoach Facotry Outlet Onlinecould have negatively affected itsLouis Vuitton Handbagsgrowth momentum just asCoach OutletApple released the iPhone 4S in earlyCoach Outlet OnlineOctober. "We believe theCoach Factory Storelegal uncertainties between Samsung andCoach FactoryApple are waning, or put in anotherCoach Store Onlineway, the situation is turning positiveChanel Pursesfor Samsung," said Nomura analystCoach Factory OutletCW Chung. Morgan StanleyChanel Pursesanalysts said the ruling removedCoach Factory Outlet Onlinethe worst-case scenario forCoach Factory OnlineSamsung's operating profit of a hit of as much as $1.5 billion and was "clearly a major and favorable event" for the company.I got what you intend, regards for putting up. Woh I am happy to find this website through google.
d3t9ZK Im obliged for the article post.Much thanks again. Keep writing.
Post new comment |