|
|
|
Jewish World Review March 30, 2000 /23 Adar II, 5760
 |
http://www.jewishworldreview.com
HAVE YOU read much in the press recently about Al Gore's meetings with Al
Sharpton? Hillary Clinton's meetings with Sharpton?
Have you read in the press about the Democratic State House in Tennessee that
put the bust of Confederate hero Nathan Bedford Forrest in the Tennessee
Capitol. No?
It is interesting to note that weeks after Bush spoke at Bob Jones
University, the press continues to keep the story alive. When David Duke
raises his head from the rock he lives under, as he does from time to time,
the press paints the picture of a hateful Republican party in league with
Duke. When Pat Buchanan fulminates about World War II or the Jewish lobby,
the press has a field day, calling down the heavens to denounce Buchanan and
the party where he made his reputation. Yet, by comparison, there is relative
silence with regard to reporting on the Democrats' embrace of Al Sharpton.
Gore, along with Hillary Clinton, has bent over backwards and forwards to
gain the support and endorsement of Sharpton. Sharpton is now viewed by
Democrats as the face of civil rights in New York, as well as nationally, and
for Democrats to win at the ballot, they view his support as critical. By our
count, these candidates have met with Sharpton over ten times within the past
year.
Furthermore, while the press says nothing about this, it is beyond
debate that Sharpton and his followers are far more of a threat to Jews than
Duke and Buchanan combined. Indeed, Jews have died as a result of Sharpton's
hatred and incitement, no one has died because of Duke or Buchanan.
Need we be the only ones to remind? Sharpton established his reputation by
smearing a district attorney as the guilty party in the alleged rape of
Tawana Brawley. It was later revealed that in this hoax she was not raped,
she was not smeared with feces, there was no KKK stamp on a bag she was
allegedly stuffed into, and the district attorney was not guilty.
Not bad enough? In a 1995 landlord-tenant dispute in Harlem, Sharpton rallied
his thugs against "The White Interloper" --- a Jewish man who owned Freddy's
Fashion Mart. Sharpton formed a boycott committee whose chairman continually
denounced "The Jewish Department Store" and following a Sharpton-inspired
demonstration, one of the protesters burned Freddy's to the ground, killing
himself and seven others.
Martin Luther King, Jr. wouldn't even let himself be photographed with the
militants in his community, and he renounced them at every turn. There is but
one photograph of King with Malcolm X and that, King allowed, only after
Malcolm renounced his bigotry and made a conversion of the heart. Sharpton
remains, to this day, unapologetic on all scores.
Yet, in their quest to win,
liberals see no reason not to beg for Sharpton's support. We believe there
are just some things worth more than winning. Not kowtowing to a
race-baiting, anti-Semitic bigot is one and the press owes its community of
newspaper readers and television watchers the same accountability about this
story that it has no problem in reporting about when fringe radicals
associate themselves with the Republican party.
It is a very sad commentary on our politics when leading members of one party
can embrace the likes of Sharpton for the purposes of political expediency.
It is a far sadder commentary when our press refuses to hold accountable such
politicians for embracing the likes of Sharpton. There is a vibrant cause for
civil rights in this country, for inclusion, for love, for equality. Both
parties have articulate speakers and leaders who embody such noble causes.
Sharpton, however, is not one of them, and he deserves the rebuke of the party he
affiliates with. Barring that, the racial and religious communities should
rebuke Sharpton, his movement, and the politicians who encourage the vileness
for which he stands. If none of this can happen in today's Democratic party,
at least the media could spill some ink and spend some time explaining the
sorry state of affairs to the community it purportedly represents. If that
can't happen, then maybe the media can ask Al Gore why he didn't -- and hasn't
-- opposed his state party's move to recognize Forrest. He was more than a
confederate hero, after all. He founded the Ku Klux
By Matthew Brooks and Seth Leibsohn
While the head of the Republican party, Jim Nicholson, has denounced Duke at
every turn and while Buchanan has left the Republican party, realizing it
does not support his principles, there is, right now, a far more odious thing
happening among liberals. It augurs a tremendous threat to the Jewish
community -- as it does for all communities -- and the press has said hardly
anything.
Indeed, the
district attorney won a civil defamation suit against Sharpton on this very
point, yet Sharpton remains unrepentant. Worse: when a Chassidic Jew
accidentally collided his car into a black man in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, Sharpton
rallied the Crown Heights black community into a frenzy. Sharpton railed
against the responsible "Diamond Merchants," a code-word for Jews, and led a march through the neighborhood. From this march, a four-day
pogrom took place in Crown Heights and Yankel Rosenbaum was knifed to death.
Indeed, it owes more
accountability because there is a moral difference between embracing bigots
and bigots who embrace a political party and are then denounced by the
leaders of that party - as is the case, for example, with Duke and the
Republican party.
Matthew Brooks is the executive director of the Jewish Policy Center, a
think tank based in Washington, DC. Seth Leibsohn is the center's director of
policy.
Comments by clicking here.
