Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site ea.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!kel
From: kel@ea.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Jesse and Farrakhan - (nf)
Message-ID: <10100059@ea.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Jul-84 13:14:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ea.10100059
Posted: Mon Jul 16 13:14:00 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jul-84 04:28:52 EDT
References: <413@tty3b.UUCP>
Lines: 36
Nf-ID: #R:tty3b:-41300:ea:10100059:000:1386
Nf-From: ea!kel    Jul 16 12:14:00 1984

#R:tty3b:-41300:ea:10100059:000:1386
ea!kel    Jul 16 12:14:00 1984



I must question whether even uncle Ron is stupid enough
to believe that the Republican party is clean of bigotry.
Reagan's remarks have historically been opportunistic
media posturing, and his condemnation of Farrakhan appears
to be more of the same.

As a digression, it strikes me that Farrakhan's stand on
the creation of a black Muslim state is hardly any more
radical, in racial terms, than the existence of Israel,
so repudiation of Farrakhan while running for leadership
in the major international political/economic/military
supporter of Israel constitutes a symbolic slap in the
face to Jackson's most staunch supporters.  (Ye gods,
what a sentence! ...sorry.)  Hence, it would as asinine
for Jackson to step on Farrakhan as it would be for Ron
to condemn Jerry Falwell as a bigot, though on a smaller
scale, since Falwell controls vast sums of money.

I have always maintained that Reagan is really much less
of a statesman than a highly strategic pawn.  Whose pawn
is a key question to which I don't have a supportable
reply.  I can only point out that when a pawn is placed
in a position of such political power as the US presidency,
that pawn's master's may be expected to do very well.
The only factions that have done at all well in the
economy of the past four years are the military producers
and the bankers.

I desperately hope this comment annoys SOMEBODY.

	Ken