Mr. Ellison Needs No Further Exposure to Debate His Agenda - It is Plain for All to See

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Feb 17, 2010 at 15:37

Let us observe, first and foremost, that Keith Ellison is a politician. Presuming that he is also an American citizen, one would, of a necessity, believe that he was brought up in a household that was at least nominally aware of the citizenship responsibilities of an American citizen, allowing him to seize the opportunities afforded him that would eventually land him in political office. One cannot fault him in that process; it is part of the American dream.

But issue is taken with the apparent underpinning philosophies that he holds to when considering that the things he stands for are in juxtaposition and contradiction to the political framework he has ascended to, for in a deeper understanding of the belief system he owes his allegiance to, it has been summarily acknowledged as anti-American.

But does this mean that he is anti-American specifically? How does this portend to the anxieties and admitted paranoia of so many Americans, of the admitted paranoia of Dr. Pipes? That remains to be seen.

What we can observe here in the land of political plebiscites is that, by himself, MR. Ellison presents nothing more than a minority point of view in a sea of majority opinion that is suspect of his motivations, of his alliances, of his allegiances. It changes perspective though when he continues to develop his partisanship, not with democratic fellows on political issues that concern his constituents, but with politicos that are ambitious in their yearning to 'change' things to fit their personal agenda of life as they see it, to the disadvantage of the citizenship he is supposed to be in service to. His ecumenical posturing and dual perspective on the Middle East issues are enough to generate that concern.

That he won his election should not be viewed as an indication that his electorate is primarily Muslim, or that they share his religious 'tolerant' views. He ran as a democrat, and generally speaking from times past, it is enough in left of center electorate to propel him into office, irrespective of his belief system.

I seriously doubt Dr. Pipes will ever get his 'audience' with Mr. Ellison; for to do so, Mr. Ellison would have to concede that his remarks about Dr. Pipes are as much in error as he has perceived the comments against himself-nope, not likely to happen. Unless there were a compelling reason for electoral purposes (and probably not even then), there is not a reason sufficient enough in evidence for exposing himself to the scrutiny that was buried when he ran for office. He might even think that if there were a snowball's chance on a hot Chicago afternoon that he could influence a positive reaction from Dr. Pipes that he could make the offer. But that is where it likely ends.

Besides, like the photo op shows, he's got better friends and better venues to attend to, and that makes more sense about Mr. Ellison and what he's doing with his politics than conceding to the arguments that his agenda and associations are not what they really seem.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".