Hey, there! Log in / Register

Election roundup: So what did Walsh promise Golar Richie?

Walsh sign in Irish

Welcome to Dot forwards this photo of a Walsh campaign sign in the auld sod.

So Charlotte Golar Richie apparently spent some anguished hours trying to decide whom to endorse for mayor. The Herald reports:

She promised the crowd Walsh would appoint a woman police superintendent and that his City Hall cabinet will reflect “50 percent people of color and women.”

The Globe didn't go quite that far, saying only that

Walsh had committed to installing a cabinet that is at least 50 percent people of color, and ensuring that minorities and women are among the top ranks of the Boston Police Department.

Walsh and former opponents cross a street.

Scott Brown poses with a sumo wrestler in Tokyo.

Evercandidate Roy Owens accuses District 7 incumbent Tito Jackson of forcing good Christians to pay for "abortion and other satanic rituals" (the copy of his flier provided by Jamarhl Crawford, who is running a sticker campaign against both of them).

Topics: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

The first thing that came to mind when I read this was "Better not read those Herald comments."

up
Voting closed 0

... though Ipersonally learned long ago NEVER try doing this.

up
Voting closed 0

Don't even need to. I feel like I'm reading some of them right here.

up
Voting closed 0

What if someone promises to appoint the very best possible people to all open positions, regardless of gender or skin color or religious background or sexual identity or ethnicity or whatever other thing has nothing to do with the job, and if it ends up 100% people of color or people of vaginas or people of freckles and red hair, so be it?

Cripes (to borrow an apt phrase from another poster.)

Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com

up
Voting closed 0

That said, it sounds like leadership in city government and the police department have been overwhelmingly white for ...ever. I think in that case it would be fine to open the binders full of candidates and pick competent leaders for all departments with the goal of including constituencies that have been excluded for ... ever.

up
Voting closed 0

The city is more than 50% people of color, so people in city positions should be chosen in a fashion that roughly looks like there was somewhat of an honest effort to recruit people from all different circles, not just the white males in power picking their friends.

up
Voting closed 0

People of color normally refers to blacks, and sometimes (when politically convenient) darker-skin hispanics. Last time I checked, blacks made up less than 24% of the city's population, followed by Hispanics (most of whom will do not fall into the "of color" category at approximately 15%. Why in the world should we stick to the 50% figure given a much lower population percentage, not to mention much lower quality pool of candidates (fewer college degree holders per capita, much higher crime rate per capita, etc?)

up
Voting closed 0

The city is more than 50% people of color. It's 100% people of color.

up
Voting closed 0

What I fail to understand is why any position should be closed to a qualified candidate solely because said candidate is of a certain gender or certain skin color. It is the epitome of the type of biased policy you decry in the final portion of your sentence.

Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com

up
Voting closed 0

So the other half of the cabinet is going to be ghosts?

Seriously, "people of color" makes anybody who says it sound like a complete idiot.

up
Voting closed 0

I promise my administration will be completely transparent to the good people of Boston.

up
Voting closed 0

It's easy to forget that white protestants ran this town and state for a few centuries.

There was a time when white Irish Catholics were the "dirty immigrants" who weren't welcome to apply for jobs in the private sector never mind in city government.

That we have two candidates making commitments to have an inclusive city government is a good thing, not a bad one.

up
Voting closed 0

"People of color" is a legitimate term but I guess it's too "P.C." for some people or something.

up
Voting closed 0

1. I expect I'll never understand this term, since

"People of color" = "People having color" = "Colored People"

If "Colored People" is unacceptable to anyone, why should "People of color" be acceptable to anyone?

2. "Colored People" - as in the National Association for the Advancement of.

I expect I'll never understand why the NAACP didn't ditch their name when the world determined that the term "Colored People" is unsuitable/objectionable/offensive.

up
Voting closed 0

I've heard older people or seniors referred to as "people of age". What is the point of that? Doesn't EVERYONE have an "age"?

"People of color" is exactly the same as "colored people", which just goes to show how random politically correct terminology is. Two terms that are identical for all intents and purposes, yet one is the proper way to speak and one is essentially forbidden. Every few years someone decides the old term is out and the new one is in.

up
Voting closed 0

I have yet to hear Asians be called "colored people."

up
Voting closed 0

Africans were brought to the continent as slaves because of their resistance to the malaria that became endemic shortly after settlement. They were here to stay as property, as part of a plantation system expected to persist for centuries (along with the malaria). Terminology developed which distinguished slaves from citizens based on skin color. It's familiar enough that we need not repeat it, but a significant 20th century variant was "colored people." Full citizenship for Americans of African origin didn't happen for a century after the abolition of slavery, and the terminology persists as well.

Asians were brought to America in large numbers for the settlement of the West, but as temporary indentured servants ("coolies") rather than as permanent slaves. They were supposed to go back once America was done with them. Like African slaves, they were non-citizens, but America set it up for them not to reproduce in this country (prohibiting Chinese women from coming to America and prohibiting Chinese men from marrying American women - American women could even lose their citizenship for marrying Chinese). The Chinese have the special honor of being the only people with a law (the Exclusion Act of 1882) directed solely at keeping them out of America. Alien Land Laws were passed in many states with the purpose of preventing Asians from owning any land or property in America. Because of this history, terminology developed focusing not as much on skin color ("yellow peril" notwithstanding) as on country of origin (chinaman, chink).

Different histories, different forms of oppression, different slurs. Trying to understand the two histories of racism as a single system would be difficult, much as it was difficult to figure out how to classify Asians in the Jim Crow South. The tradition would be to interpret Asians as non-American on a different basis than skin color, perhaps with an emphasis on speech, name, or customs.

Bringing us back to the present day, Asians are counted or not counted as "people of color" depending on the convenience of the argument. If it's about Boston being a majority-minority city, Asians are counted. If it's about lack of minority presence at Boston Latin, Asians are not counted.

up
Voting closed 0

"People of color," yes. "Colored people?" Never heard it. I was initially responding to the "people of color = colored people" idiocy upthread.

up
Voting closed 0

Think about it, then get an actual screen name.

up
Voting closed 0

And I thought it might be interesting to unpack exactly why this might be: historically, racism against Asians in America has focused on their national origin rather than their skin color. I'm sorry you didn't find that interesting. At least four other people did, though.

up
Voting closed 0

The basic idea of it comes down to that "colored people" was used as a racist term to delegitimate people, "people of color" was coined by liberals and anti-racists as a response to that. It's one of those things that I don't see a reason to complain about. Like how does it inconvenience your life in any way to know that "people of color" or LGBTQ (or whatever else people complain about when it comes to political correctness "run amok") are terms that exist?

up
Voting closed 0

...they'd prefer to call them niggers, faggots and dykes just like the good ol days.

nomenclature is a pain in the ass. wading into the semantics of pc/racist speech is a waste of time. At the end of the day who is in charge? Who calls the shots? White people. Rich white people, specifically. Some people would like to say that's because those particular people fought hard to get there and deserve to be calling the shots, or maybe those other people just have some sort of genetic thing preventing them from rising above because it's been like a real long time since we got rid of slavery - what's their excuse?

I'm sick of all of it. If people haven't clued in to reality by now I have as much desire to convince them of it as I do of convincing the spare change guy at Park Street that he should go get a job in accounting.

up
Voting closed 0

Doesn't "people of color" really just mean black?

My cousins are Puerto Rican but white, I always find it weird that PC libs insist on calling them "people of color".

up
Voting closed 0

It means anyone who isn't white. It's meant to be a replacement to the term non-white, because that makes it sound like white is the norm.

up
Voting closed 0

Unless you're George Zimmerman, who was "white hispanic".

up
Voting closed 0

There are white Hispanics. My mom and sister are white Hispanics. The downfalls of how most people think of race today is that it's all very much an American-centric view which doesn't account for the complexities of race in Latin-American and other cultures.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm not a fan of categorizing all nonwhites together under an "other" label, because that's something Neo-Nazis do.

up
Voting closed 0

Yeah personally I like to be otherized by people trying to guess at my race. "Well are you black? Hispanic? Some sort of Asian? Arab?" Fun times.

up
Voting closed 0

But that doesn't mean that the people who voted for her are. I voted for Charlotte and will not be voting for Marty. How does she plan to enforce these agreement?

up
Voting closed 0

So...what exactly is a campaign poster (a poster with a picture of the Massachusetts State House, and not Boston City Hall) for the Boston mayoral race doing in Ireland? Does this always happen? Do the good people of Ireland generally take this much of an interest in Boston or Massachusetts politics?

up
Voting closed 0

I wonder if the good people of Boston generally take this much of an interest in Boston or Massachusetts politics....

And yes, Gene Rivers, that was a dig.

up
Voting closed 0

Yeah...Rivers. He had a good thing going 20 years ago and has been trying to coast off of it ever since. Loses more and more respect with me every time he opens his mouth.

up
Voting closed 0

I can tell you approximately where this is- Galway! Walsh's ancestral county. Where his dad was born.

Someone in some Gaeltacht is proud that their nephew is a finalist.

It's funny. A joke. Get it?

If Arroyo made the final, there would be stuff in Puerto Rico. Same with Barros in Cape Verde. If Yoon had made the final 4 years back, probably not.

up
Voting closed 0

I actually have family in Arroyo, PR. No one talks about Felix Arroyo there.

up
Voting closed 0

I thought it was in P.R., and I'm too lazy to look it up. They'red be a sign or 2 in that neck of the woods.

up
Voting closed 0

This sign means Walsh knows what he is doing and he has the pulse of the times . . . this is a message to Irish Boston and Irish Massachusetts. He or at least someone in his campaign knows of what we feel about the current state of horrid affairs. If you don't feel horrid about these days- you won't get it. Walsh has got my vote.

up
Voting closed 0

Would you spell it out for us catholic german americans? Because I'd like to know more about the narrative. Thank you, friend.

up
Voting closed 0

The narratives are the problem. we'll never agree. Take care.

up
Voting closed 0

What about Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke? In that case, the Supreme Court explicitly prohibited the government's use of strict racial quotas (specifically a policy where 16% of an incoming medical school class had to be minorities).

up
Voting closed 0

MLK Jr is rolling in his grave. "Content of their character..."

Making promises to hire people of color or hire women is just as bad as saying "I promise to hire all white men."

Pathetic that's all it took to get her endorsement.

up
Voting closed 0

You know one line of one speech, and you think you have King's exact position nailed down? Hilarious.

Only a person ignorant to what King actually said, wrote, and stood for would say something so ignorant. Martin Luther King supported affirmative action, quotas, and reparations. In addition to the whole part about his kids "one day" living "in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character" he also said that he had a dream...

...that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

We can all see how that dream turned out. Funny how no one ever quotes that part of the speech. Here are some other MLK quotes:

A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him, to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis.

If a city has a 30% Negro population, then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas

Whenever this issue of compensatory or preferential treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask for nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic. For it is obvious that if a man is entering the starting line in a race 300 years after another man, the first would have to perform some impossible feat in order to catch up with his fellow runner.

Reporter: "Do you feel it's fair to request a multi-billion dollar program of preferential treatment for the Negro, or any other minority?"

Dr. King: "I do indeed...Within common law, we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs…. America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans... They could negotiate loans from banks to launch businesses. They could receive special points to place them ahead in competition for civil service jobs... There was no appreciable resentment of the preferential treatment being given to the special group."

If you're going to pretend to know what a dead man would think about certain issues, you should at least open one of his books or do maybe 10 minutes worth of research before making such claims.

up
Voting closed 0

... to come up with information that goes beyond Fox-ish talking points.

up
Voting closed 0

Careful, soon you'll have to bring up how MLK addressed class and well that's too close to socialism for us!

up
Voting closed 0

very unflattering camera angle

up
Voting closed 0

...that they stuck the State House instead of City Hall behind him. Bad angle, better building.

up
Voting closed 0

I wish we would measure diversity as more than skin color.

It should include religious diversity. Why no mention of Jews, Muslims or Buddists in Walsh's cabinet?

It's ethnic: would Walsh's cabinet include any Albanians, Haitians, etc?

It's sexual identity: why didn't Walsh mention if the LGBT community would be represented in his planned cabinet?

up
Voting closed 0

Last time I checked, successful and competent people of color (i.e. lawyers, businessmen, scholars not teaching white guilt 101) tend to be much more conservative than their white counterparts, does that mean Boston is taking a sharp turn to the right? Or are we getting the usual crew - turner, wilkerson and thugriquez types?

up
Voting closed 0

It's like I'm really reading the Herald comments. Somewhere, Keanu Reeves goes whoa.

up
Voting closed 0