Rexroad Charges Racism in Woodland Vote

I don’t know anything about Woodland politics, but I think it’s great that Rexroad had the guts to come out and say what he did. Unfortunately, there are racists everywhere – in both parties – and the only way to overcome it is to speak out against it. As a republican, I also think it’s great that Rexroad spoke his mind because too, too often, liberals believe Republicans are racist, which is not only inaccurate, but personally hurtful. Let’s hope that Rexroad is able to turn this into something positive for woodland.

I don’t know anything about Woodland politics, but I think it’s great that Rexroad had the guts to come out and say what he did. Unfortunately, there are racists everywhere – in both parties – and the only way to overcome it is to speak out against it. As a republican, I also think it’s great that Rexroad spoke his mind because too, too often, liberals believe Republicans are racist, which is not only inaccurate, but personally hurtful. Let’s hope that Rexroad is able to turn this into something positive for woodland.

DPD: Please give us a little history of Woodland Councilman/Supervisor Rexroad’s public voting record on Woodland peripheral growth. Yolo Republican(both offical and closet-type)political players have little problem with his political rhetoric,that has the potential to attract Democratic voters to his Republican run at the 6th District Assembly seat,as long as it remains just talk and he doesn’t challenge the status quo where it counts.. I will remain skeptical of Supervisor Max Rexroad , professional political consultant for Republican candidates in CA, until his voting record(especially tie-breaking) demonstrates his commitment to his rhetoric.

DPD: Please give us a little history of Woodland Councilman/Supervisor Rexroad’s public voting record on Woodland peripheral growth. Yolo Republican(both offical and closet-type)political players have little problem with his political rhetoric,that has the potential to attract Democratic voters to his Republican run at the 6th District Assembly seat,as long as it remains just talk and he doesn’t challenge the status quo where it counts.. I will remain skeptical of Supervisor Max Rexroad , professional political consultant for Republican candidates in CA, until his voting record(especially tie-breaking) demonstrates his commitment to his rhetoric.

Matt has been great to work with on several issues including resistance to peripheral growth and support for bicycle safety. He is straightforward and does speak his mind. He also takes the time to respond promptly to voter emails and requests.

No I don’t agree with everything he does. Give the man some credit. He’s a lot more involved than most politicians and willing to listen to the people he represents.

Matt has been great to work with on several issues including resistance to peripheral growth and support for bicycle safety. He is straightforward and does speak his mind. He also takes the time to respond promptly to voter emails and requests.

No I don’t agree with everything he does. Give the man some credit. He’s a lot more involved than most politicians and willing to listen to the people he represents.

I’m a liberal Democrat and I have a lot of respect for Matt Rexroad…even more than some electeds who refer to themselves as Democrat but don’t abide by true Democratic principles.

I don’t always agree with Rexroad, but I appreciate his straightforwardness.

I’m a liberal Democrat and I have a lot of respect for Matt Rexroad…even more than some electeds who refer to themselves as Democrat but don’t abide by true Democratic principles.

I don’t always agree with Rexroad, but I appreciate his straightforwardness.

Matt is probably right.

What is sad is this type of
voting could probably be seen in ALL races.

Now, where in our little wonderful town could there be republicans prentending to be democrats?
Hmmm…..

Matt is probably right.

What is sad is this type of
voting could probably be seen in ALL races.

Now, where in our little wonderful town could there be republicans prentending to be democrats?
Hmmm…..

it’s hard for me to get a sense of what rexroad’s doing here without knowing the political backgrounds of the people who ran in those two races. i know that he walked precincts for some of the candidates that he is now claiming were discriminated against, so his disappointment may be cming from more factors than just the hint of racism. i know so little about woodland politics that there’s no way i could even get a feel for it.

that being said, knowing nothing about the people involved, i would tend to agree with rexroad that anglo voters, not just in woodland, often tend to vote the way they do for what are essentially racist reasons. i’ve heard my own grandfather rant about mexicans “taking over” san antonio city politics (which has several layers of historical absurdity, when you thnk about it, starting with the fact that the pols in question are native san antonians and he moved to texas from california). and i noticed a fair amount of stuff with racial overtones in reisig’s literature attacking lenzi’s native american ties in the DA race a while back.

it’s nice that rexroad broached the subject, since it’s written off as “liberal whining” when democrats bring it up. the fact of the matter is that this country has a long history of racism, and it affects a great deal of how our society functions, in every corner. the problem is that so many people try to avoid admitting that it plays a role in their own conceptions and actions, because “racist” has become (rightfully so) such a stigma.

one cannot learn to deal with a problem until they admit it’s there. every person who grows up in this society kjnows how to “read” race and its subtext, it’s unavoidable. you can try not to act on it, and you can try to make things better, but it’s there, and denying it just makes it stronger.

it’s hard for me to get a sense of what rexroad’s doing here without knowing the political backgrounds of the people who ran in those two races. i know that he walked precincts for some of the candidates that he is now claiming were discriminated against, so his disappointment may be cming from more factors than just the hint of racism. i know so little about woodland politics that there’s no way i could even get a feel for it.

that being said, knowing nothing about the people involved, i would tend to agree with rexroad that anglo voters, not just in woodland, often tend to vote the way they do for what are essentially racist reasons. i’ve heard my own grandfather rant about mexicans “taking over” san antonio city politics (which has several layers of historical absurdity, when you thnk about it, starting with the fact that the pols in question are native san antonians and he moved to texas from california). and i noticed a fair amount of stuff with racial overtones in reisig’s literature attacking lenzi’s native american ties in the DA race a while back.

it’s nice that rexroad broached the subject, since it’s written off as “liberal whining” when democrats bring it up. the fact of the matter is that this country has a long history of racism, and it affects a great deal of how our society functions, in every corner. the problem is that so many people try to avoid admitting that it plays a role in their own conceptions and actions, because “racist” has become (rightfully so) such a stigma.

one cannot learn to deal with a problem until they admit it’s there. every person who grows up in this society kjnows how to “read” race and its subtext, it’s unavoidable. you can try not to act on it, and you can try to make things better, but it’s there, and denying it just makes it stronger.

“i would tend to agree with rexroad that anglo voters, not just in woodland, often tend to vote the way they do for what are essentially racist reasons.”

I’m sure this has been studied by political scientists — maybe David Greenwald knows the scholarship — but I would guess that if you took any ethnic or racial group in America, not just white Anglos, you would find that on the margin, they are more likely to vote for someone of their same group than a different race or ethnicity. Put a person named Chiang, for example, on the ballot in San Francisco, and all else held equal, he would do better among Chinese-American voters than he would if his surname were Chavez or Chester.

The same is true of Irishmen, Jews, blacks, etc. Put a person named Chavez, for example, on the ballot in San Francisco, and all else held equal, he would do better among Mexican-American voters than he would if his surname were Chiang or Chester.

What Rexroad identifies in Woodland is almost certainly true. It would be true in almost any town, and among any ethnic group in the country.

“i would tend to agree with rexroad that anglo voters, not just in woodland, often tend to vote the way they do for what are essentially racist reasons.”

I’m sure this has been studied by political scientists — maybe David Greenwald knows the scholarship — but I would guess that if you took any ethnic or racial group in America, not just white Anglos, you would find that on the margin, they are more likely to vote for someone of their same group than a different race or ethnicity. Put a person named Chiang, for example, on the ballot in San Francisco, and all else held equal, he would do better among Chinese-American voters than he would if his surname were Chavez or Chester.

The same is true of Irishmen, Jews, blacks, etc. Put a person named Chavez, for example, on the ballot in San Francisco, and all else held equal, he would do better among Mexican-American voters than he would if his surname were Chiang or Chester.

What Rexroad identifies in Woodland is almost certainly true. It would be true in almost any town, and among any ethnic group in the country.

if that were universally true, rich, there would be far more atheist, black and latino members of government than, say, jewish ones, and there would be as many muslims as jews. bias is not a universal constant, it actually varies a fair amount depending on the specific groups involved.

the recent repeat of the 1930s kenneth clark doll test, where both white and black children chose white dolls as “pretty” and back dolls as “bad” is highly suggestive of the fact that racism ends up teaching people of all races to be biased against blacks and biased towards whites. i suspect that it is also true for the rest of our racially/ethnically complex society here in california, that all people end up internalizing to varying degrees.

of course, there’s also the matter of political identity. i would be far more likely to vote for a liberal of another race than a conservative of my own race. i suspect that on the whole, white liberals would be more likely to do so than white conservatives (bobby jindal is one of the exceptions that prove the rule), just by a simple look at the virtual nonexistence of nonwhite republicans (or nonwhite conservative democrats, for that matter) nationwide.

but, as rexroad has shown, such an assumption is by no means certain.

it would certainly be interesting to see how a city council race by, say, jann murray-garcia would be recieved here in davis. tim taylor was well recieved in his school board race, but i suspect that there are limits to the openmindedness of the electorate when nonwhites are too critical of racism or bias in the white community.

if that were universally true, rich, there would be far more atheist, black and latino members of government than, say, jewish ones, and there would be as many muslims as jews. bias is not a universal constant, it actually varies a fair amount depending on the specific groups involved.

the recent repeat of the 1930s kenneth clark doll test, where both white and black children chose white dolls as “pretty” and back dolls as “bad” is highly suggestive of the fact that racism ends up teaching people of all races to be biased against blacks and biased towards whites. i suspect that it is also true for the rest of our racially/ethnically complex society here in california, that all people end up internalizing to varying degrees.

of course, there’s also the matter of political identity. i would be far more likely to vote for a liberal of another race than a conservative of my own race. i suspect that on the whole, white liberals would be more likely to do so than white conservatives (bobby jindal is one of the exceptions that prove the rule), just by a simple look at the virtual nonexistence of nonwhite republicans (or nonwhite conservative democrats, for that matter) nationwide.

but, as rexroad has shown, such an assumption is by no means certain.

it would certainly be interesting to see how a city council race by, say, jann murray-garcia would be recieved here in davis. tim taylor was well recieved in his school board race, but i suspect that there are limits to the openmindedness of the electorate when nonwhites are too critical of racism or bias in the white community.

DPD:

Thank you for your kind words.

Skeptical:

You are so right. My secret plan is not really to get on the Davis City Council.

I’m really going to move to Marin to challenge the incumbent in the 6th Assembly District — Jared Huffman.

My platform of opposing same sex marriage and ending needle exchange programs should play well there.

Matt Rexroad
662-5184

DPD:

Thank you for your kind words.

Skeptical:

You are so right. My secret plan is not really to get on the Davis City Council.

I’m really going to move to Marin to challenge the incumbent in the 6th Assembly District — Jared Huffman.

My platform of opposing same sex marriage and ending needle exchange programs should play well there.

Matt Rexroad
662-5184

DPD,

Good story, but you cannot let Rexroad get by on this one so easily.

I commend him for speaking up on this, but where was he on the Pat Lenzi issue when the candidate HE supported (Jeff Reisig) had hit pieces on her “Native Americanism?”

Is he only willing to speak up on racism in elections when it negatively affects his candidate? I suggest that he give this some thought.

Ann

DPD,

Good story, but you cannot let Rexroad get by on this one so easily.

I commend him for speaking up on this, but where was he on the Pat Lenzi issue when the candidate HE supported (Jeff Reisig) had hit pieces on her “Native Americanism?”

Is he only willing to speak up on racism in elections when it negatively affects his candidate? I suggest that he give this some thought.

Ann

“if that were universally true, rich, there would be far more atheist, black and latino members of government than, say, jewish ones, and there would be as many muslims as jews. bias is not a universal constant, it actually varies a fair amount depending on the specific groups involved.”

Wu,

Re-read my post (more carefully) and you will see that your complaint against what I wrote misses the mark. You are arguing against an absolute. I specifically said it is a marginal condition. And while I don’t know of the specific studies which would demonstrate this — hey, it’s been a helluva long time since I was in college — I am fairly certain these studies have been done of black, Asian, Latino, etc. voters and proved true of all groups. That is, on the margin, all else held equal, a Latino surname, for example, will result in a higher Latino vote for that candidate.

If you think that is untrue, consider the famous case of Loretta Brixey. She was a very promising, intelligent Latina woman who aspired to win a seat in Congress in Orange County. She was strongly supported by Democratic Party leaders and by Latino organizations. Unfortunately for her, most Latino voters had no idea that Mrs. Brixey was Hispanic. So she ran and lost, getting a terribly poor turnout and vote total from Latino voters. In fact, exit polls suggest a majority of Latino voters voted for her opponent, Crazy Bob Dornan.

The only hope for Democrats in that district, Democratic Party leaders knew, was to bring out the Hispanic vote. And to do that, they felt they had to have a Hispanic on the ballot. Acceding to this reality, Loretta Brixey changed her name. She became Loretta Sanchez. And when she ran as Ms. Loretta Sanchez (her maiden name), she tripled her vote total among Latino voters, and caused a 50% increase in the percentage of Latinos who turned out at the polls.

While that story is a matter of fact, I have heard other Hispanics with non-Spanish surnames suggest the same thing has happened to them. Bill Richardson, who is a Latino, has explicitly said that if his last name was López-Collada, his mother’s maiden name, he would have done much better among Latino voters in New Mexico. He has added that because Richardson is his surname, not Ojeda (his paternal grandmother’s name, he has little support among Latino voters outside of New Mexico in his presidential bid.

Finally, what you say about Jewish representatives is just stupid. Not only does it have nothing whatsoever to do with what I said about marginal voters, but it completely ignores the reasons why Jews like Dianne Feinstein or Barbara Boxer rise to the heights of our national legislature. It shows your ignorance of Jewish-American culture, ambition, talent and achievement and what follows from that.

“if that were universally true, rich, there would be far more atheist, black and latino members of government than, say, jewish ones, and there would be as many muslims as jews. bias is not a universal constant, it actually varies a fair amount depending on the specific groups involved.”

Wu,

Re-read my post (more carefully) and you will see that your complaint against what I wrote misses the mark. You are arguing against an absolute. I specifically said it is a marginal condition. And while I don’t know of the specific studies which would demonstrate this — hey, it’s been a helluva long time since I was in college — I am fairly certain these studies have been done of black, Asian, Latino, etc. voters and proved true of all groups. That is, on the margin, all else held equal, a Latino surname, for example, will result in a higher Latino vote for that candidate.

If you think that is untrue, consider the famous case of Loretta Brixey. She was a very promising, intelligent Latina woman who aspired to win a seat in Congress in Orange County. She was strongly supported by Democratic Party leaders and by Latino organizations. Unfortunately for her, most Latino voters had no idea that Mrs. Brixey was Hispanic. So she ran and lost, getting a terribly poor turnout and vote total from Latino voters. In fact, exit polls suggest a majority of Latino voters voted for her opponent, Crazy Bob Dornan.

The only hope for Democrats in that district, Democratic Party leaders knew, was to bring out the Hispanic vote. And to do that, they felt they had to have a Hispanic on the ballot. Acceding to this reality, Loretta Brixey changed her name. She became Loretta Sanchez. And when she ran as Ms. Loretta Sanchez (her maiden name), she tripled her vote total among Latino voters, and caused a 50% increase in the percentage of Latinos who turned out at the polls.

While that story is a matter of fact, I have heard other Hispanics with non-Spanish surnames suggest the same thing has happened to them. Bill Richardson, who is a Latino, has explicitly said that if his last name was López-Collada, his mother’s maiden name, he would have done much better among Latino voters in New Mexico. He has added that because Richardson is his surname, not Ojeda (his paternal grandmother’s name, he has little support among Latino voters outside of New Mexico in his presidential bid.

Finally, what you say about Jewish representatives is just stupid. Not only does it have nothing whatsoever to do with what I said about marginal voters, but it completely ignores the reasons why Jews like Dianne Feinstein or Barbara Boxer rise to the heights of our national legislature. It shows your ignorance of Jewish-American culture, ambition, talent and achievement and what follows from that.

By the way, I forgot to mention one important fact about the Brixey case. Mrs. Brixey originally had run as a Republican. Nevertheless, her Latino vote totals as a Democrat named Brixey paled next to her vote totals as a Democrat named Sanchez. Bob Dornan was so shocked by the great Hispanic vote against him that he charged that the Democrats had brought out illegal immigrants to vote for her. But that charge never got anywhere, as far as I recall. And Bob Dornan was 5 cards short of a full deck, to boot.

By the way, I forgot to mention one important fact about the Brixey case. Mrs. Brixey originally had run as a Republican. Nevertheless, her Latino vote totals as a Democrat named Brixey paled next to her vote totals as a Democrat named Sanchez. Bob Dornan was so shocked by the great Hispanic vote against him that he charged that the Democrats had brought out illegal immigrants to vote for her. But that charge never got anywhere, as far as I recall. And Bob Dornan was 5 cards short of a full deck, to boot.

It seems that I have “hit a nerve” with Mat Rexroad and his response is ,not surprisingly, to distract with ridicule. I apologize if my Assembly District number designation was incorrect. As noted by Anonymous 5:04PM,Mat Rexroad’s support for Reisig for Yolo DA was about a REAL electoral issue rather than rhetorical flourishes.

It seems that I have “hit a nerve” with Mat Rexroad and his response is ,not surprisingly, to distract with ridicule. I apologize if my Assembly District number designation was incorrect. As noted by Anonymous 5:04PM,Mat Rexroad’s support for Reisig for Yolo DA was about a REAL electoral issue rather than rhetorical flourishes.

i suspect we’re arguing shades of nuance here for the most part, rich. your example of linda sanchez is a good one. but this:

Finally, what you say about Jewish representatives is just stupid. Not only does it have nothing whatsoever to do with what I said about marginal voters, but it completely ignores the reasons why Jews like Dianne Feinstein or Barbara Boxer rise to the heights of our national legislature. It shows your ignorance of Jewish-American culture, ambition, talent and achievement and what follows from that.

rather misses the mark of what should have been a simple enough point, namely that bias is not as simple nor as equitable as merely everyone favoring their own identity group. if bias was as simple as that, then one would expect political representatives to roughly mirror demographic numbers, but they don’t.

in reality, some groups are disproportionately represented, and some disproportionately underrepresented. this reflects, i believe, differing levels of bias or prejudice towards different groups in society at large. it’s not a case of everyone favoring their own group so much as there being overall biases against some groups more than others. black and latino voters are more willing to vote for white voters than whites tend to be willing to do the same. while everyone has a bias towards their own group (although that doll study i linked to upthread calls that assumption into question), their relative biases towards various other groups and their relative willingness to vote for someone other than their group are not the same across the board. hence the disparities.

thus the reason for the high numbers of jewish politicians (nearly all of them democrats) given their 2-3% of the electorate is because non-jews (especially democrats and liberals) are comfortable voting for jews. that other groups numerically larger than jewish-americans do not see the same kind of support reflects, i believe, a relative bias against them by the white majority (and yes, the whole question of identity/ethnicity is far more complex than i’m presenting it here).

as for your explanation for the disparity:

It shows your ignorance of Jewish-American culture, ambition, talent and achievement and what follows from that.

not only does it presume things about me that are laughably false, it implies that those demographic groups that are underrepresented lack “culture, ambition, talent, achievement, and what follows from that.”

which i flat-out reject. perhaps you will mock me for my multiculturalist leanings, but i honestly do not think that any ethnicity or culture lacks culture, ambition, talent, or achievement, not in any quanitifiable, objective sense. i find the assertion of such rather offensive, truth be told; one does not have to be greater than someone else to have great worth. human culture is not something that gains its value through scarcity or competition.

i suspect your preference for explaining success and failure by essentially internal traits, rather than looking at external systemic bias and power relations within our society, is why you are a conservative and i am a liberal.

i suspect we’re arguing shades of nuance here for the most part, rich. your example of linda sanchez is a good one. but this:

Finally, what you say about Jewish representatives is just stupid. Not only does it have nothing whatsoever to do with what I said about marginal voters, but it completely ignores the reasons why Jews like Dianne Feinstein or Barbara Boxer rise to the heights of our national legislature. It shows your ignorance of Jewish-American culture, ambition, talent and achievement and what follows from that.

rather misses the mark of what should have been a simple enough point, namely that bias is not as simple nor as equitable as merely everyone favoring their own identity group. if bias was as simple as that, then one would expect political representatives to roughly mirror demographic numbers, but they don’t.

in reality, some groups are disproportionately represented, and some disproportionately underrepresented. this reflects, i believe, differing levels of bias or prejudice towards different groups in society at large. it’s not a case of everyone favoring their own group so much as there being overall biases against some groups more than others. black and latino voters are more willing to vote for white voters than whites tend to be willing to do the same. while everyone has a bias towards their own group (although that doll study i linked to upthread calls that assumption into question), their relative biases towards various other groups and their relative willingness to vote for someone other than their group are not the same across the board. hence the disparities.

thus the reason for the high numbers of jewish politicians (nearly all of them democrats) given their 2-3% of the electorate is because non-jews (especially democrats and liberals) are comfortable voting for jews. that other groups numerically larger than jewish-americans do not see the same kind of support reflects, i believe, a relative bias against them by the white majority (and yes, the whole question of identity/ethnicity is far more complex than i’m presenting it here).

as for your explanation for the disparity:

It shows your ignorance of Jewish-American culture, ambition, talent and achievement and what follows from that.

not only does it presume things about me that are laughably false, it implies that those demographic groups that are underrepresented lack “culture, ambition, talent, achievement, and what follows from that.”

which i flat-out reject. perhaps you will mock me for my multiculturalist leanings, but i honestly do not think that any ethnicity or culture lacks culture, ambition, talent, or achievement, not in any quanitifiable, objective sense. i find the assertion of such rather offensive, truth be told; one does not have to be greater than someone else to have great worth. human culture is not something that gains its value through scarcity or competition.

i suspect your preference for explaining success and failure by essentially internal traits, rather than looking at external systemic bias and power relations within our society, is why you are a conservative and i am a liberal.

The writer above apparently assumes that if I were to vote against Jann Murray-Garcia it must be a matter of prejudice. In fact, regardless of the color Jann Murray-Garcia came in, I could not in good conscience vote for her for any office and it’s a condescending and naive assumption, and seemingly a shared fantasy here, that everything that happens to her and to other minority individuals is based on race.

The writer above apparently assumes that if I were to vote against Jann Murray-Garcia it must be a matter of prejudice. In fact, regardless of the color Jann Murray-Garcia came in, I could not in good conscience vote for her for any office and it’s a condescending and naive assumption, and seemingly a shared fantasy here, that everything that happens to her and to other minority individuals is based on race.

“not only does it presume things about me that are laughably false, it implies that those demographic groups that are underrepresented lack “culture, ambition, talent, achievement, and what follows from that.”

Wu,

Every culture has different norms and different standards. Some cultural norms emphasize and produce talented people in different areas. Jewish culture produces an inordinate number of smart, successful people. That is just inarguable. And it’s also universal for Jews. It’s as true in Argentina or Russia or France or Australia, as it is in America and Canada.

“not only does it presume things about me that are laughably false, it implies that those demographic groups that are underrepresented lack “culture, ambition, talent, achievement, and what follows from that.”

Wu,

Every culture has different norms and different standards. Some cultural norms emphasize and produce talented people in different areas. Jewish culture produces an inordinate number of smart, successful people. That is just inarguable. And it’s also universal for Jews. It’s as true in Argentina or Russia or France or Australia, as it is in America and Canada.

Rich its also true for Christians, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Hindu’s, blacks, whites, asians, Namibians,Mexicans,Germans,Poles, Greeks,Samoans,Iraqis,Indians, and native americans. In fact talent and intellect are totally independent of a person’s religious, social, racial, cultural, and national background. In my opinion your statement just perpetuates one more sterotype about jews.

Ron Glick

Rich its also true for Christians, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Hindu’s, blacks, whites, asians, Namibians,Mexicans,Germans,Poles, Greeks,Samoans,Iraqis,Indians, and native americans. In fact talent and intellect are totally independent of a person’s religious, social, racial, cultural, and national background. In my opinion your statement just perpetuates one more sterotype about jews.

Ron Glick

anon 10:21 –

not at all. as i mentioned way up at the beginning of this thread, individuals make their political choices based on a lot of things, and political agendas certainly make a big part of that. i wonder if that isn’t a part of woodland’s races that rexroad isn’t being straight about, honestly (i have no way of knowing).

but on the aggregate, community and society-wide level, these patterns are pretty obvious, and to argue that it couldn’t play a role in a given decision is as overstated as to say that it is the only factor that could lead to a given political decision.

anon 10:21 –

not at all. as i mentioned way up at the beginning of this thread, individuals make their political choices based on a lot of things, and political agendas certainly make a big part of that. i wonder if that isn’t a part of woodland’s races that rexroad isn’t being straight about, honestly (i have no way of knowing).

but on the aggregate, community and society-wide level, these patterns are pretty obvious, and to argue that it couldn’t play a role in a given decision is as overstated as to say that it is the only factor that could lead to a given political decision.

I would hope that Rich Rifkin would reread, rethink and reputiate his comment describing the biological superiority of Jews. He appears to have real difficulty in bringing his critical analytical skills to this subject.

I would hope that Rich Rifkin would reread, rethink and reputiate his comment describing the biological superiority of Jews. He appears to have real difficulty in bringing his critical analytical skills to this subject.

Before I am challenged word for word by Rich Rifkin, allow me to clarify.
“Talent/Intellect” is an inherited biological quality that does not appear to be concentrated in any one genetic subgroup. “Success” certainly depends upon how you define it. Muslim “culture”,as we all are well-aware, held a preeminent place in the areas of math and science only “yesterday” on the scale of human history.

Before I am challenged word for word by Rich Rifkin, allow me to clarify.
“Talent/Intellect” is an inherited biological quality that does not appear to be concentrated in any one genetic subgroup. “Success” certainly depends upon how you define it. Muslim “culture”,as we all are well-aware, held a preeminent place in the areas of math and science only “yesterday” on the scale of human history.

I wrote: “Jewish culture produces an inordinate number of smart, successful people.”

I never mentioned biology at all. I never considered it.

But then, “Another Jewish Vanguard reader” chimes in: “I would hope that Rich Rifkin would reread, rethink and reputiate his comment describing the biological superiority of Jews.”

I would hope that “Another Jewish Vanguard reader” would reread my words and apologize for his misconstruction.

Ron Glick: “Rich its also true for Christians, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Hindu’s, blacks, whites, asians, Namibians, Mexicans, Germans, Poles, Greeks, Samoans, Iraqis, Indians, and native americans.”

“It’s also true?” What is it you are speaking of?

I stated matter of factly that “Jewish culture produces an inordinate number of smart, successful people.” The other cultures you mention produce smart and successful people. No one denies that. The question is one of inordinateness. And on that measure, their is clearly a difference. Do you doubt the objective numbers, Ron?

To repeat, I never mentioned biology at all. I specifically cited culture. It is that Ashkenazi culture which has, despite a very small total population*, produced 49 Nobel Laureates in medicine, 27 in chemistry, 23 in economics, 44 in physics and 12 in literature. No other cultural group even comes close. The difference in the measure on a per capita basis is orders of magnitude.

And the Nobel prize is but one small measure of the Ashkenazim. Similar achievements could be found in a wide variety of fields, including most areas of commerce, law, academia, fine arts, etc.

The only significance of stating all that is to make it understandable why, as Wu Ming first brought up, there are an inordinate number of Jews currently in elective office.** Those individuals are drawn from a larger group which produces more highly ambitious lawyers and wealthy business people: and it is from that subset of our population that most U.S. Senators, for example, come.

* Ashkenazi Jews make up 0.1167% of the world’s population.

** In 2001, Jews made up 1.4% of the U.S. population and that number was declining.

I wrote: “Jewish culture produces an inordinate number of smart, successful people.”

I never mentioned biology at all. I never considered it.

But then, “Another Jewish Vanguard reader” chimes in: “I would hope that Rich Rifkin would reread, rethink and reputiate his comment describing the biological superiority of Jews.”

I would hope that “Another Jewish Vanguard reader” would reread my words and apologize for his misconstruction.

Ron Glick: “Rich its also true for Christians, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Hindu’s, blacks, whites, asians, Namibians, Mexicans, Germans, Poles, Greeks, Samoans, Iraqis, Indians, and native americans.”

“It’s also true?” What is it you are speaking of?

I stated matter of factly that “Jewish culture produces an inordinate number of smart, successful people.” The other cultures you mention produce smart and successful people. No one denies that. The question is one of inordinateness. And on that measure, their is clearly a difference. Do you doubt the objective numbers, Ron?

To repeat, I never mentioned biology at all. I specifically cited culture. It is that Ashkenazi culture which has, despite a very small total population*, produced 49 Nobel Laureates in medicine, 27 in chemistry, 23 in economics, 44 in physics and 12 in literature. No other cultural group even comes close. The difference in the measure on a per capita basis is orders of magnitude.

And the Nobel prize is but one small measure of the Ashkenazim. Similar achievements could be found in a wide variety of fields, including most areas of commerce, law, academia, fine arts, etc.

The only significance of stating all that is to make it understandable why, as Wu Ming first brought up, there are an inordinate number of Jews currently in elective office.** Those individuals are drawn from a larger group which produces more highly ambitious lawyers and wealthy business people: and it is from that subset of our population that most U.S. Senators, for example, come.

* Ashkenazi Jews make up 0.1167% of the world’s population.

** In 2001, Jews made up 1.4% of the U.S. population and that number was declining.

“Success” certainly depends upon how you define it.

This is a fair enough point. I agree that “success” is subjective to some extent. But for the purposes of this discussion, I was using “success” to mean achievement in various fields of commerce, law, academia, medicine, etc., which results in overrepresentation in high levels of government.

I wrote: “And on that measure, their is clearly a difference.”

That should have been: “And on that measure, there is clearly a difference.”

“Success” certainly depends upon how you define it.

This is a fair enough point. I agree that “success” is subjective to some extent. But for the purposes of this discussion, I was using “success” to mean achievement in various fields of commerce, law, academia, medicine, etc., which results in overrepresentation in high levels of government.

I wrote: “And on that measure, their is clearly a difference.”

That should have been: “And on that measure, there is clearly a difference.”

Where does one even begin with Rexroad? I’m surprised that so many people are willing to look beyond his right-wing ideology just because he speaks his mind or is forthright. Who cares? Resident Bush speaks his mind, is forthright, goes with his heart, etc…and it’s a disaster. I don’t care if you are articulate or if you are straightforward if you do things to hurt people and this country.
Look at Rexroad’s history and his votes:
He runs a Republican consulting firm that works in smarmy ways to denigrate Democratic candidates. He takes money from the funder of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. His firm is under FBI investigation. He calls those who need social services in Yolo County, the ‘worst people’. He thinks voting based on a racial-sounding name is discriminatory but is against gay rights. He opposes protection for land and wildlife through legislation. He brings up his ‘military service’, yet wrote a letter begging people to help get him out of Iraq. He said Osama bin Laden was a Democrat who endorsed John Kerry. He discounted an Inconvenient Truth as a movie about Al Gore’s wanting to run for President. He called Halliburton to see if they needed a counter-protest and made a point to mention Davis, even though it wasn’t involved (smearing by association). He supports building dams versus protecting rivers, then smears those who protect them as being hypocritical by making the assumption that they participated in a celebration of a dam (which they didn’t). He smears the Sierra Club regarding immigration (without the facts). He denigrates the environmental community at each turn. He writes for the Flash Report. That alone should be enough to show that his Republcan conservativism is so right-wing it is out of touch with 99% of Yolo. He’s wrong for this County, and wrong for our Country.
He’s charming, but don’t let that fool you. If you care about equality, fairness, helping the needy (beyond one day a year with turkeys), the environment, and freedom…this is not your guy. He’s a bully. And bullies need to be called out.

Where does one even begin with Rexroad? I’m surprised that so many people are willing to look beyond his right-wing ideology just because he speaks his mind or is forthright. Who cares? Resident Bush speaks his mind, is forthright, goes with his heart, etc…and it’s a disaster. I don’t care if you are articulate or if you are straightforward if you do things to hurt people and this country.
Look at Rexroad’s history and his votes:
He runs a Republican consulting firm that works in smarmy ways to denigrate Democratic candidates. He takes money from the funder of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. His firm is under FBI investigation. He calls those who need social services in Yolo County, the ‘worst people’. He thinks voting based on a racial-sounding name is discriminatory but is against gay rights. He opposes protection for land and wildlife through legislation. He brings up his ‘military service’, yet wrote a letter begging people to help get him out of Iraq. He said Osama bin Laden was a Democrat who endorsed John Kerry. He discounted an Inconvenient Truth as a movie about Al Gore’s wanting to run for President. He called Halliburton to see if they needed a counter-protest and made a point to mention Davis, even though it wasn’t involved (smearing by association). He supports building dams versus protecting rivers, then smears those who protect them as being hypocritical by making the assumption that they participated in a celebration of a dam (which they didn’t). He smears the Sierra Club regarding immigration (without the facts). He denigrates the environmental community at each turn. He writes for the Flash Report. That alone should be enough to show that his Republcan conservativism is so right-wing it is out of touch with 99% of Yolo. He’s wrong for this County, and wrong for our Country.
He’s charming, but don’t let that fool you. If you care about equality, fairness, helping the needy (beyond one day a year with turkeys), the environment, and freedom…this is not your guy. He’s a bully. And bullies need to be called out.

Greenwald,Wu Ming Rifkin,Rexroad,
All of you seem to step over the many stones in the path and land on the one that says “Race Card”. You are all suffering from rectal cranial displacement. And yes I am latino.

Greenwald,Wu Ming Rifkin,Rexroad,
All of you seem to step over the many stones in the path and land on the one that says “Race Card”. You are all suffering from rectal cranial displacement. And yes I am latino.

Anon: you could claim to be whatever you want, but without even a name, your claiming to be latino would be as meaningful as me claiming to be black.

Anon: you could claim to be whatever you want, but without even a name, your claiming to be latino would be as meaningful as me claiming to be black.

Rifkin… suffice to say that the Chinese,Japanese and subcontinent Indian cultures,just to name a few, also produced and are increasingly generating “smart and successful” world diaspora populations. Perhaps you are overlooking the truly “smart and successful” who manage to survive and even prevail outside and without the material resources of the current “System”.

Rifkin… suffice to say that the Chinese,Japanese and subcontinent Indian cultures,just to name a few, also produced and are increasingly generating “smart and successful” world diaspora populations. Perhaps you are overlooking the truly “smart and successful” who manage to survive and even prevail outside and without the material resources of the current “System”.

anon 10:53 –

ok, so what would your explanation for the woodland vote totals be? what stones are we skipping over?

it’s easy to take vague potshots. if you’ve got something better to say, then say it.

i’m still waiting to see if anyone from woodland has any idea about the politics of these school board candidates. noone’s responded on rexoad’s site, and everyone here appears to be davisites.

anon 10:53 –

ok, so what would your explanation for the woodland vote totals be? what stones are we skipping over?

it’s easy to take vague potshots. if you’ve got something better to say, then say it.

i’m still waiting to see if anyone from woodland has any idea about the politics of these school board candidates. noone’s responded on rexoad’s site, and everyone here appears to be davisites.

Anon 12:16

I completely agree with your point. The cultural variables which helped to shape the Ashkenazim are quite similar to those which have resulted in the success of the groups you mention. (Another minority which meets the same status variables you left out are the Lebanese of West Africa.) While on a global percentage basis, the success of the Ashkenazim trumps that of even those others, the nature of their cultures is similar in this regard.

Anon 12:16

I completely agree with your point. The cultural variables which helped to shape the Ashkenazim are quite similar to those which have resulted in the success of the groups you mention. (Another minority which meets the same status variables you left out are the Lebanese of West Africa.) While on a global percentage basis, the success of the Ashkenazim trumps that of even those others, the nature of their cultures is similar in this regard.

Rich,

I am a Jew and I find you to be neither talented nor genius. As a matter of fact, what you are claiming can be seen as a bit bias and self-promoting.

Enough with your self-aggrandizement.

Rich,

I am a Jew and I find you to be neither talented nor genius. As a matter of fact, what you are claiming can be seen as a bit bias and self-promoting.

Enough with your self-aggrandizement.

“I find you to be neither talented nor genius. Enough with your self-aggrandizement.”

I don’t often agree with Mr. Rifkin. However, your criticism seems needlessly mean-spirited and personal. I don’t recall Rifkin making personal remarks of your type. It’s unfortunate you didn’t have anything rational to say.

“I find you to be neither talented nor genius. Enough with your self-aggrandizement.”

I don’t often agree with Mr. Rifkin. However, your criticism seems needlessly mean-spirited and personal. I don’t recall Rifkin making personal remarks of your type. It’s unfortunate you didn’t have anything rational to say.

Is it any different in Woodland When Art Pimentel ran for city council?? His huge thing was to get out the hispanic voters to give him a bullet vote because he is Latino. What is the difference? The only difference is he comes right out and says to vote for him because he is Latino. You do not hear white candidates going out and saying vote for me because I am white. They would be in jail.

Is it any different in Woodland When Art Pimentel ran for city council?? His huge thing was to get out the hispanic voters to give him a bullet vote because he is Latino. What is the difference? The only difference is he comes right out and says to vote for him because he is Latino. You do not hear white candidates going out and saying vote for me because I am white. They would be in jail.

Racism, Discrimination and sexism are all part of the political game. The people who run elections themselves discriminate on many levels. What is the first thing they do? They get a demographic report on the voters separated by age, race, education, income, you name it, it is discriminated against on a daily basis in elections. The Latino voters of course pound the Latinos to go vote because if they do they are going to pick a Latino politician. The mailers are made different for different races based on stereotypes, for the elderly based on their stereotypes. It has been pounded into the head of voters for years and years. “You will only be represented fairly if you elect someone like yourself.”
This election just proves that in the polls. No advertising was done and look at the results. The voters are just programmed that way now. If there was 58% Latino voters, it would have been the exact opposite.
The idea that the knowledge of a candidate matters is somewhat not true. The media does a great job of twisting everything around during elections that the truth is mud. So it falls back on who the voters “feel” will best represent themselves.

Racism, Discrimination and sexism are all part of the political game. The people who run elections themselves discriminate on many levels. What is the first thing they do? They get a demographic report on the voters separated by age, race, education, income, you name it, it is discriminated against on a daily basis in elections. The Latino voters of course pound the Latinos to go vote because if they do they are going to pick a Latino politician. The mailers are made different for different races based on stereotypes, for the elderly based on their stereotypes. It has been pounded into the head of voters for years and years. “You will only be represented fairly if you elect someone like yourself.”
This election just proves that in the polls. No advertising was done and look at the results. The voters are just programmed that way now. If there was 58% Latino voters, it would have been the exact opposite.
The idea that the knowledge of a candidate matters is somewhat not true. The media does a great job of twisting everything around during elections that the truth is mud. So it falls back on who the voters “feel” will best represent themselves.

It is pure rhetoric.

Two latina females won the election. The only reason Rexroad complained is because the guy he endorsed lost and he thought he could make some political points.

I am more worried in what does Rexroad have against female latina candidates?

It is pure rhetoric.

Two latina females won the election. The only reason Rexroad complained is because the guy he endorsed lost and he thought he could make some political points.

I am more worried in what does Rexroad have against female latina candidates?

Rikin is full of himself. There is nothing mean spirited about calling him out on his arrogance and bias remarks towards everyone who is NOT a Jew.

Thank goodness most Jews don’t have views like Rich Rifkin.

You want to see mean spirited? Read Rifkin’s bs articles in the Enterprise.

Rikin is full of himself. There is nothing mean spirited about calling him out on his arrogance and bias remarks towards everyone who is NOT a Jew.

Thank goodness most Jews don’t have views like Rich Rifkin.

You want to see mean spirited? Read Rifkin’s bs articles in the Enterprise.

Racism? Rexroad has no credibility when it comes to mean-spirited attacks. Check out this from TPM.

New GOP Attack Group Used Ad Firm with Party Ties
By Justin Rood – September 14, 2006, 4:04PM
More on the Electronic Freedom Fund, the new deep-pocketed conservative 527 on the scene.

The group works exclusively with a two-year-old California consulting firm called Meridian Pacific, which, in further testament to its GOP bonafides, is headed by a onetime senior Republican National Committee official.

John Peschong joined Meridian Pacific in 2005, after seven years as the Western States Director for the RNC. Meridian Pacific recently handled a half-million-dollar series of television and print buys for the Economic Freedom Fund, a right-wing “527” group.

As a so-called 527 group, EFF is barred from coordinating its activities with specific parties or candidates. Peschong did not immediately return a phone message asking about his involvement with the group’s activities.

As we reported earlier, EFF’s sole backer is Robert Perry, who funded the infamous Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group during the 2004 elections. The group was so successful in smearing Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry that the group’s name became a verb: “To swiftboat” now means to unfairly malign a candidate through a broad and intense media campaign focused on a single topic.

Meridian Pacific has been caught pulling some dirty tricks of its own: last year the firm was accused of stealing electronic documents from a local governmental organization to benefit its corporate client, Pacific Gas & Electric. When it received the documents from MP senior executive Tom Ross, PG&E notified the organization, local law enforcement, and the FBI. And fired Meridian Pacific. (In later news accounts, Ross blamed a 21-year-old intern for the fiasco. The firm insisted it had done nothing illegal or unethical.)

No federal campaign has reported payments to Meridian Pacific this cycle, although in June the National Republican Congressional Committee paid the firm $2,085 for “generic office equipment” and “generic current computer equipment,” federal filings show.

Racism? Rexroad has no credibility when it comes to mean-spirited attacks. Check out this from TPM.

New GOP Attack Group Used Ad Firm with Party Ties
By Justin Rood – September 14, 2006, 4:04PM
More on the Electronic Freedom Fund, the new deep-pocketed conservative 527 on the scene.

The group works exclusively with a two-year-old California consulting firm called Meridian Pacific, which, in further testament to its GOP bonafides, is headed by a onetime senior Republican National Committee official.

John Peschong joined Meridian Pacific in 2005, after seven years as the Western States Director for the RNC. Meridian Pacific recently handled a half-million-dollar series of television and print buys for the Economic Freedom Fund, a right-wing “527” group.

As a so-called 527 group, EFF is barred from coordinating its activities with specific parties or candidates. Peschong did not immediately return a phone message asking about his involvement with the group’s activities.

As we reported earlier, EFF’s sole backer is Robert Perry, who funded the infamous Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group during the 2004 elections. The group was so successful in smearing Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry that the group’s name became a verb: “To swiftboat” now means to unfairly malign a candidate through a broad and intense media campaign focused on a single topic.

Meridian Pacific has been caught pulling some dirty tricks of its own: last year the firm was accused of stealing electronic documents from a local governmental organization to benefit its corporate client, Pacific Gas & Electric. When it received the documents from MP senior executive Tom Ross, PG&E notified the organization, local law enforcement, and the FBI. And fired Meridian Pacific. (In later news accounts, Ross blamed a 21-year-old intern for the fiasco. The firm insisted it had done nothing illegal or unethical.)

No federal campaign has reported payments to Meridian Pacific this cycle, although in June the National Republican Congressional Committee paid the firm $2,085 for “generic office equipment” and “generic current computer equipment,” federal filings show.