Why is Obama Snubbing Asian Americans?
January 13, 2008
The Feb. 5 ballot is in my hot little hands. I’m a vote by mail guy because, that way, voting ranks up there with my Visa bill. When it’s due, it gets paid. I don’t forget.
But since I’m a “decline to state,” I can’t vote in the most interesting primary in California in some time.
So I’m tearing up my voter ballot and re-registering immediately. I suggest you do the same if you’re one of those privacy-seeking “independent” types. You have until Jan. 22 to get on a partisan list, Democratic or Republican (I know there are a few elephants in the tea house).
It’s just too important this year. By November, the biggest choice for your party will have been made — without you.
This year, California has moved up its primary from June to February, in order not to have your franchise trumped early in the game. An early ballot also becomes a critical showcase for the most Asian American state in the union. Do you want to make a difference?
Re-register, state your preference and decide now who will represent you.
‘Nobama’?
Since most of the APA community tends Democratic, the big vote will be your preference: Clinton or Obama.
This is causing quite a divide among APA politicos. But read on for the issue that may separate the candidates for you.
Obama made hay in Iowa when he scored big among women and independents. It may seem logical that Obama must have something if he can score big in the white-belt.
But for my money, the real test for Obama is how he will play in a state where the minorities are the majority and where Asian Americans are more numerous than blacks.
So far, Obama has not done well when it comes to communicating with Asian Americans.
It’s odd given Obama’s background. His prep school buddies from Punahou, now the elites of Hawai‘i, were the most rabid early supporters of an Obama candidacy. Most of those backers were haoles, the island way of referring to whites. But Obama’s overall Hawai‘i connections have always given him a veneer of being an “Asian-friendly” candidate.
But now there’s real evidence that it would be wrong to assume that Obama is a “rainbow” guy, or that he would even address serious Asian American concerns.
Barry Obama, the old Punahou High alum, has positively snubbed a humble questionnaire from an APA grassroots organization. While most of the Democratic candidates (Clinton and Edwards among them) submitted answers to the survey, Obama has not.
That’s a record equal to the Republican snub. Giuliani? Romney? Nothing. Obama’s in real unbecoming company.
The “dis” is not taken lightly by the originators of the questions, 80-20, a nonpartisan group that has developed over the years into an effective APA political advocacy organization. Led by S.B. Woo, a former lieutenant governor in Delaware, 80-20 is not some fly-by-night group. And its questions to the candidates weren’t puffballs.
They were specific questions like: If elected, will you direct the labor secretary to hold public hearings regarding the validity of the huge amount of statistical data strongly suggesting discriminatory practices against Asian Americans in workplaces today? If the data were shown valid, will you issue a directive to the Labor Department asking it to focus on enforcing Executive Order 11246 (mandating equal employment opportunity) on behalf of Asian Americans, since in the past similar efforts have already been made on behalf of women and other minorities?
Why would the “change agent” be afraid to say yes to any of that?
Other questions asked include whether Obama would seek nomination of qualified Asian Americans to serve as federal judges; Asian Ameicans currently represent 0.6 percent of judges despite being 4.5 percent of the population, and more than 5 percent of the lawyers in America’s biggest firms.
Woo said Obama’s staff simply declined to answer the questionnaire and responded with rhetorical inanities like “when [Obama] is president, an Asian American will have a better chance to be president.”
Woo said Obama staffers are also fond of pointing out that Obama’s brother-in-law is a Chinese American. And that will take care of equal opportunity in the workplace?
I’ll cut Obama a break. He can just let me know his answers if he’s serious about APA empowerment (see e-mail below).
But 80-20 is so incensed it’s started a nationwide e-mailing campaign to “Defeat Obama.”
It’s one thing to be slighted by some Desperate Housewives. It’s another thing when it’s an arrogant snub from a history chaser like Obama. Clinton and Edwards answered yes to all of 80-20’s questions. What’s the difference? One word: experience.
E-mail: emil@amok.com
Comments
155 Responses to “Why is Obama Snubbing Asian Americans?”
Got something to say?
Where Barack Stands on AAPI Issues
Provide Universal Health Care: There are nearly 2.4 million Asian Americans without health insurance. Barack Obama is committed to signing legislation by the end of his first term to ensure that all Americans have affordable, quality and portable health care coverage. Obama’s plan will save a typical American family up to $2,500 every year on medical expenditures by modernizing the U.S. health care system and promoting disease prevention and strengthening public health.
End Racial Profiling and Fight Discrimination: Obama has spent his career as a community organizer, civil rights lawyer and elected advocate fighting to end all forms of discrimination. Obama passed a law in the Illinois State Senate to identify and combat racial profiling. He will use his life experiences to enact meaningful policies that protect the rights of minorities.
Reform Immigration: Barack Obama has been a leading voice to comprehensively reform our immigration system by providing a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, securing our border and fixing the broken immigration bureaucracy. As president, he will fight for comprehensive reform that prioritizes keeping families together and improving the H1-B visa program.
Invest in Education: Obama will reform and adequately fund No Child Left Behind. He will hold schools accountable for teaching English-language learners, and will continue his fight to increase and reform college financial aid.
Invest in Small Businesses: AAPIs own more than 1.1 million small businesses. Barack Obama will support federal programs that invest in minority-owned businesses, provide technical assistance to small business owners and reduce discrimination in lending.
Equity for Filipino Veterans: Approximately 250,000 Filipino troops joined American forces in World War II. However, our country has yet to recognize the sacrifice that these veterans have made for our country. Barack Obama is a strong advocate of the Filipino Veterans Equity Act of 2007, which will fulfill America’s promise to recognize and support these brave veterans.
http://aapi.barackobama.com
http://www.asianamericansforobama.com/
Emil, there are some very specific reasons why Obama’s staff declined to answer the questionairre. This blogger has been following this issue very closely and I think you should check out this link:
http://www.reappropriate.com/index.php?paged=2
http://www.reappropriate.com/?p=908
I think after you read those links you should write a followup article because those articles may give you a different perspective on this.
Bravo, Emil.
Ditto, Randy, AND angry Asian-American woman.
But, narrow APAmerican issues and inputs ignore the larger issue: theoneocon agendas and ploys, as in the likelihood? or at least probability of another preemptive “first-strike” diversion vis-a-vis Iran.
On this latter score, it has been obvious Billary is an apologist for “hegemony” or “global free enterprise,” and that Obama ain’t that far behind?
It is instructive, in this regard, that now, finally, when the august 80/20 panjandrums choose to speak out, it is on same aforesaid “narrow” island of “minority” perks and opportunities at the public trough.
Never mind the basic sociocultural illiteracies in the matter of perceptions of ALL minorities, whence spring the lack of respect, forget understanding.
Bottom line: nothing is likely to change, and neither position nor perks nor remunerations will help herein.
Alas!, we minorities, as such, are, at heart, no different from our majority movers-and-shakers. That’s why they remain in the driver’s seat, the perch we would if we could command.
But, it’s all a charade, insofar as, today, IEDs seem to prove to be equal to smart bombs, dumb bombs as well.
Power is as illusory as “wealth.” For sure, celebrity.
Frank Eng
I posted this before and it was deleted and I don’t understand why. Was it because it didn’t fit into your negative article?
Where Barack Stands on AAPI Issues
Provide Universal Health Care: There are nearly 2.4 million Asian Americans without health insurance. Barack Obama is committed to signing legislation by the end of his first term to ensure that all Americans have affordable, quality and portable health care coverage. Obama’s plan will save a typical American family up to $2,500 every year on medical expenditures by modernizing the U.S. health care system and promoting disease prevention and strengthening public health.
End Racial Profiling and Fight Discrimination: Obama has spent his career as a community organizer, civil rights lawyer and elected advocate fighting to end all forms of discrimination. Obama passed a law in the Illinois State Senate to identify and combat racial profiling. He will use his life experiences to enact meaningful policies that protect the rights of minorities.
Reform Immigration: Barack Obama has been a leading voice to comprehensively reform our immigration system by providing a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, securing our border and fixing the broken immigration bureaucracy. As president, he will fight for comprehensive reform that prioritizes keeping families together and improving the H1-B visa program.
Invest in Education: Obama will reform and adequately fund No Child Left Behind. He will hold schools accountable for teaching English-language learners, and will continue his fight to increase and reform college financial aid.
Invest in Small Businesses: AAPIs own more than 1.1 million small businesses. Barack Obama will support federal programs that invest in minority-owned businesses, provide technical assistance to small business owners and reduce discrimination in lending.
Equity for Filipino Veterans: Approximately 250,000 Filipino troops joined American forces in World War II. However, our country has yet to recognize the sacrifice that these veterans have made for our country. Barack Obama is a strong advocate of the Filipino Veterans Equity Act of 2007, which will fulfill America’s promise to recognize and support these brave veterans.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/aapiissues
http://www.asianamericansforobama.com/
http://aapi.barackobama.com/
Hello Emil.
I follow your column with great interest and was disappointed to see such a one-sided report on Obama’s record in supporting APAs. If you visit http://www.asianamericansforobama.com, you can get a link to the official response from the campaign on the 80-20 survey. (80-20 has been claiming that Obama provided no response and that’s simply not true.)
Obama’s connection to the Asian Pacific American community is not as shallow as simply growing up in Hawaii, having lived in Asia as youth, or having an Indonesian American sister and Chinese Canadian brother-in law–although I submit to you that those are true and meaningful connections with Asian Americans. (Moreover, Obama’s brother in law is actually an adviser to the campaign on AAPI issues who has a history of involvement in the Democratic party and championing AAPI issues.) Here is an excerpt:
“Barack Obama is committed to appointing qualified AAPIs to high-level positions in his administration, and he will strengthen the White House Initiative on ASain Americans and Pacific Islanders. Barack Obama will also build upon his work as a civil rights lawyer and community organizer to end racial discrimination and advance equal opportunity in the workplace and the federal government. Finally, as a former constitutional law lecturer, Obama understands the importance of a diverse judiciary and he is committed to increasing the representation of qualified minorities and women, including qualified Asian Americans, when there are vacancies int he federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court.” Indeed, Obama has been a supporter of Asian Americans in the legal profession–keynoting the 2005 National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) conference.
In a field of exceptional Democratic candidates, Obama stands out to me as the strongest Asian American candidate. I would not discount the importance of his multicultural background and immigrant roots. And he is strong on issues that matter to AAPIs. He has a compassionate stand on comprehensive immigration reform and protecting family-based immigration, investments in quality K-12 and higher education, more support to minority-owned small businesses, meeting with Filipino Veterans and supporting the Filipino Veterans Equity Act as a member of the Veteran Affairs Committee, and a history as a civil rights lawyers who fought to protect voting rights and state legislator who expanded healthcare for folks in Illinois. He is the only candidate that has a specific page on his site devoted to AAPIs and issues that our community cares about: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/aapiissues
Emil, I hope you will look into this issue further and set this record straight. The stakes are too high for our communities to miss the boat on this historic moment because of incomplete information.
I urge you to contact people at the Asian American Action Fund of Greater Chicago, a truly grassroots group of Asian Pacific Americans that is familiar with Obama’s record through working with him in Illinois, and endorsed him in the fall. Please speak with members of his AAPI National Leadership Council, like Wilma Chan, who represented Obama at the AAA-Fund Candidate Forum in LA in December, where he won the straw poll by 71%. http://www.aaa-fund.org/press/2007dec06.asp (Clinton and Richardson were the other candidates represented.) Or contact our APA San Francisco School Board Members Eric Mar, Hydra Mendoza, and Jane Kim–all enthusiastic Obama supporters.
Thank you.
Proud Filipina American for Obama,
Angelica Kristen Ortega Jongco
I just wanted to clarify, I wrote: “In a field of exceptional Democratic candidates, Obama stands out to me as the strongest Asian American candidate. ”
I meant to say, Obama stands out to me as the strongest candidate for Asian American communities!
Unfortunately in this race, we do not have an Asian American candidate, although I believe that an Obama presidency throws opens doors that will enable an Asian American candidate to one day walk through.
I’ve written a letter to the editor of AsianWeek, but they have so far ignored it. To be fair, I hope they will print it to balance out Emil’s opinion piece. Here it is for the online community:
January 10, 2008
Dear Editor of AsianWeek,
As you may be aware by now, the 80-20 Initiative, an Asian American national organization and their current board, under the leadership of Dr. S.B . Woo, have recently launched an unfounded and unjustified public campaign attack on one presidential candidate, Barack Obama, on behalf of “all Asian Americans”.
Their Op-Ed piece and my response appeared in the current issues of Asian American Press:
http://www.aapress.com/oped.php
As a self-described organization with a mission to “work for equality and justice for all Asian Americans” in a “nonpartisan” way, their unfounded “swift-boat” style attack on Obama, while ignoring every other candidate who didn’t respond to their PAC Questionnaire is short-sighted, foolish and wrong. Their raw political tactics reeks of hypocrisy and a symbol of great shame for me, as a fellow Asian American, and as a political activist who happens to believe in the issues they and all of us are fighting for.
I write in PROTEST and IMPLORE to you to urge 80-20 to STOP making fools out of all of us! Yes, all of us as equal and politically engaged Asian Americans!
I have read their press releases to the local Asian newspapers. I have scoured through their blogs and e-mail exchanges on their website. Yes, and I have researched the very issues on their questionnaire to this year’s batch of presidential candidates from both parties. I have also read Obama’s response to their questionnaire. I have spoken to and have documented responses from Asian American campaign organizers from several of the Democratic campaigns about 80-20’s recent, and should I say, quite bizarre behavior in attacking Obama.
80-20 has the right to attack anyone they wish, especially under their guise of a “non-partisan” group, but please, spare us some facts, will you!? Dennis Kucinich did not respond to their questionnaire. NONE of the Republican candidates responded as well! Where’s 80-20’s attack on the Republicans, who, afterall, could care less about ANY of their questionnaires, much less them as an organization?!? Where are the cries of protests and random discriminate attacks from 80-20’s Asian American Republicans? I mean, we can all appreciate some equal opportunity discrimination here, right? But just Obama?
Clearly, this is where 80-20’s hypocrisy (and perhaps their hidden partisanship agenda) is not only revealed, but rotting in the public square for all to see! Trust me, many Asian Americans across this country aren’t as stupid or out of touch with the political process and all its nuances as they all would like us to believe. Don’t pretend to “represent” any of us, if you’re an organization that can’t even sense that your current actions as an organization might actually be hurting so many Asian Americans…in ways you’re too blind to see or realize at the moment, thus your bizarre, twisted and unfounded attack on Obama.
For all the good that 80-20 seem to do, they will have undo much of it by their blunt and unfounded attacks on Obama. I suppose 80-20 must be confident enough that their actions won’t backfire on them in ways that will cause their organization to become totally irrelevant among the vast majority of Asian Americans, and beyond.
What disturbs me the most is that the people whose names are prominently on 80-20’s leadership roster knowing and consciously allow, order, and carry out this publicity stunt to try and “swift-boat” Obama. And for what?
I actually spent some time in the last several days to research everyone on the board and the current officers. I am not naive about the people who throw their support, financially and otherwise to this organization. It is with this keen knowledge that 80-20’s current actions towards Obama, the energy and resources they have put into “defeating Obama”, and their seemingly partisan-charged attempts to “swift-boat” Obama is so utterly weird, and frankly, immature, shallow, and lacking in judgment and all virtues of an upstanding organization for a cause as great as seeking equal opportunity for Asian Americans. Shame on them!
I call upon all concerned Asian Americans to take a step back, think, and if need be, organize a campaign to hold those responsible for this (ironically) discriminatory and totally unfounded, bias, and politically partisan-motivated attack on Obama…to account. This issue needs to be put before all the stakeholders, members and volunteers of 80-20 and see where they each stand. Beyond that, all major national Asian American organizations and leaders, elected and otherwise should be made aware of 80-20’s unfounded actions, and let the chips fall where they may. It’s a total shame that 80-20 have chosen to ignore ALL the Republican candidates altogether on the issues in their questionnaire.
One only needs to browse the front pages of 80-20’s current website to see how blatantly partisan and anti-Obama 80-20 is.
http://www.80-20initiative.net
If 80-20 insists on their witch hunt of Obama, Asian Americans should unite to conclude that 80-20 have NO credibility as an organization who claims to represent the issues of our vastly diverse Asian American population in this country, especially on issues of equality and opportunity. It’s also a real shame that reputable organizations and individuals of integrity who are currently associated with 80-20 should have to share the same limelight of this nasty publicity sideshow.
Finally, if 80-20 is so passionate about the issues in their questionnaire, you would think they would actually take the fight to DEFEAT the real obstacles to Asian American progress of true equality and opportunity in this country…the Republican candidates who could care less about responding or have anything to do with them or their questionnaire!!!
For once, take the fight to whom and where it matters!!! The fact is that Obama is hardly their enemy!
I am not writing this on behalf of any campaign or any candidate for the presidency, but as a concerned Asian American who cares deeply about the political process.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Mai Kou Xiong
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Several things wrong with this column.
First, it doesn’t appear Emil communicated with anyone on the other side of this issue. He got all his information from SB Woo.
Second, as Randy pointed out, there were specific reasons why the campaign did not answer some of the questions. I understand that the Clinton campaign also did not initially answer some of the questions.
Third, 80-20 doesn’t represent all Asian Americans. In fact, for an organization that has at its foundation the concept of unity, 80-20 sure spends a lot of time dividing people. If you’re not with them, you’re against them.
And finally, people from all colors and backgrounds support Obama in Hawai’i. It’s just plain wrong and sorry to point to the “haole elite” as a way of dismissing Obama’s diverse support in the Aloha State.
I am disappointed by the lack of research that went into this article.
I would hope that other Asian American voters are choosing who to support in the upcoming primaries based on their belief in the candidate and his/her ability to bring about real change and progress, rather than on a complaint that a questionnaire wasn’t filled out.
I will personally be voting for Obama for reasons much more meaningful (see the above comments) than whether he submitted one questionnaire to one questionable organization.
Come on Emil! I almost always love and appreciate your columns but this one bothered me for the same reasons mentioned by others above.
For those of us building Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders for Obama here in the SF Bay Area and throughout California, our focus is not only electing Obama as our next president, but involving new voters, giving voice to grassroots AA and PI communities, not the elites, and expanding democracy in America through the campaign.
I think that is what sets us apart from the mainstream presidential campaigns.
AAPI’s for Obama leader Eddie Wong’s Asian Week op-ed also captures the spirit of hope and change the Obama campaign for many of us as well - http://www.asianweek.com/2007/12/15/the-man-and-the-moment/
June - AsianWeek deleted my posting too. I hope they’ll print my editorial in response to S.B. Woo, Emil, and 80-20. It’s making its way to most of the major Asian American organizations in the country. Most Asian American elected officials, including the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, Chaired by U.S. Rep. Mike Honda.
Look at Obama, he does not have any leadership & confidence. We need someone with wisedom who can turn us around. We can not have someone like the dumbass Bush as our next president.
Dear Emil,
I am an Asian American and wish to thank and salute you for courageously speaking out. In our democracy that is the most powerful and important way to gain equality and power.
I have been tracking the activities of 80-20 for over 3 years and I find NO other Asian American organization that has consistently stayed true in its commitment to fight for us. SB Woo has donated tens of thousands to 80-20, publically pledged never to accept any political appointment even though he was the first Asian American to attain high level elected office as Lt. governor of DE. He has led a team of hardworking Asian American volunteer leaders in a united coalition to fight the big TOUGH battles that other good Asian American organizations shy away from.
I know of NO other Asian American organization that has succeeded in getting even one presidential candidates to commit YES in writing to specific pledges. They have gotten that from several top tier candidates. This is historic!
80-20 has been attacked in the past by Republicans as a Democratic front. Yet 80-20 has not hesitated to tackle and challenge front runners Clinton and Obama when they tried to just feed sweet words in place of measurable commitments. One by one, all of the Democratic candidates except Obama and Kucinich have pledged YES to all 6 questions of the 80-20 questionnaire which anyone can read by visiting http://www.80-20initiative.net
I believe 80-20 does a superb job of helping us understand why and how it is important to vote in bloc and it has kept us informed of the whys of its actions. With so many people working so hard for us, I for one believe the LEAST we can do is to take the time to read and understand the info on their web site. Indeed, I think once we understand the facts, we should do one better—we should support it, instead of tearing it down based on heresy and misconceptions!
Because there are but 5% or so Asian Americans, it is not easy to have the actions of such as small segment of Americans be felt—and 80-20 has done exactly that. Their impact at the voting booth has been observed and measured by reputatble institutions including Harvard Univ. They have now built on their past to accomplish what they have recently.
As to the inane question, why don’t 80-20 attack the Republican? 80-20 is an intelligent guard dog of Asian American civil rights. It follows the scent and selectively hunts down those who seek to fool us or deny us of our rights. It also recognizes that it cannot chase anything and everything all over the place. It wisely selects its battles in order to be able to continue the war on inequality. Doing the most good with its limited resources!!
The Asian American civil rights movement and that of the Blacks both have modest beginnings and the movement is a process that grows stronger each year and with the unwavering support of their respective bases. While we have not gotten any empathy from the Republicans, we have made strong gains on the Democratic side. This is why we must all support the Democratic candidate ultimately recommended by 80-20.
The war has to be won one battle at a time. And we must vote in bloc for it to succeed.
I have gone to a talk by SB Woo, and I come away elated and thankful to have heard a genuine, strategic-thinking civil rights leader. I’m now a proud dues-paying 80-20 member!!!
80-20 WANTS to work with Obama. Obama—like Clinton initially, tried to buy our support with sweet empty words. Clinton at least changed her position and finally committed, or she could easily end up being targeted by 80-20.
The reason Obama ended up being targeted is that he REFUSED over a 6-month period to sign YES to achieve specific measurable goals that others candidates have agreed to. He left us with no choice but to fight him.
Senator Obama’s political machinery has cranked into full speed attacking 80-20, falsely claiming “Sen. Obama was concerned with the wording of some of the questions, and asked 80-20 to allow some modification. This was a courtesy that was extended to other campaigns, but for whatever reason, 80-20 refused to work with Sen. Obama.”
I urge everyone to see for themselves the effort and courtesy 80-20 has shown in trying to reach out to Obama. See for yourself the Open letter to Senator Obama: http://8020politicalpower.blogspot.com/2008/01/open-letter-to-sen-obama.html
Obama NEVER submitted ANY proposed change to the questionnaire. He was not sincere about his commitments. During the past week, Asian American Obama supporters have pointedly asked the Obama campaign what specific changes they’d like to make to the 80-20 Questionnaire. They were met with awkward silence!
Do not fall prey to the old trick of divide and conquer. Already his distortions have been repeated and passed on again and again. Some of the same preceding posts are the exact same ones making the internet rounds, making it look like many share their views. Asian Americans for Obama is just his mouthpiece. He is getting his supporters to sound the “outrage.” Can’t you see it is working? Soon enough, this lie will be accepted as truth They have only one goal: get him elected.
80-20’s goal is different—fighting for all of us, even as they are attacked and misunderstood!!
Asian Americans owe it to themselves to find out about 80-20 .
READ the questionnaire! See for YOURSELF if it is reasonable. What is it that Obama is so concerned that even Clinton and Edwards and others are not???? Ha!
Ask yourself: Obama is minority himself. WHY, oh WHY is he unwilling to commit to the SAME goals that Clinton and Edwards have agreed to? We are not even asking him to stick his neck out and do more for us than the other candidates!! What is he trying to dodge and hide?
And if you support Obama, HOW are you going to hold him to his sweet empty words of fighting for us—when there is NO written promise that can be measured. You should spread the question to your Asian American Obama supporters and to Obama himself: WHY?? What is unacceptable to him in the Questionnaire?
It is not too late for Obama to change his mind and answer YES!
I recognize the symbolic significance of Obama in the White House. But I’d be a fool to vote for someone (just because he is a minority but who) does not have the moral courage to do the fair and right thing.
What Asian American need are REAL promises, not sweet words or empty symbolic gestures!
Asian Jack
Emil,
Well said. I especially like your invitation to Senator Obama’s campaign. I hope he’ll take you up on it.
It is no less than inspiring, not to mention gratifying, to read all of the above responses.
“Asian Pacific Americans” have come of age, and, if those represented by the speakers above are truly so represented, then there IS hope.
Even though this nation continues to hawk “arms” to BOTH “sides” in the Middle East, and elsewhere of course, even as its putative “president” makes mock of the very “democracy” the above “represent.”
Note too the report today on MSNBC of the rise, again, of racial, mostly “black” in this case, “harassments” in the American “workplace,” along with the continuing implosion of the domestic “economy” and the seeming reduction of the proud “blue collar” earners to the status of Third World servitors in bars and restaurants.
Tiny rays of hope too, like Phil Nash’s report on a “Chinese-American” woman’s admirable adventures as a teacher in the Navajo Nation, where respect comes with some “diss’ing.”
Obama converts above are persuasive, and, may I suggest?, their pique, and ire, at the 80/20 crowd brings to mind that APA panjandrums are no different from those of other colors. And the “defeat Obama” slogan simply reflects the color of their interests, in this case, obviously “Establishment.”
Why should they be different from Pelosi and Murtha? Or Lantos?
Sad fact of the matter, from this aged perch, is the possibility that that young teacher on the Navajo res may well be MORE important as groundwork than seems likely on the surface.
If the neocon leadership survives long enough, some day in the distant future, there may yet be “justice” awaiting them in the long, winding roads of realpolitik. A nouveau Nuremberg? That too.
That is, unless they succeed in blowing up all they intend to blow up. In which case, stop worrying about the crumbling ice shelves of Antarctica OR the relative merits of gasahols distilled from corn OR grass, and forget that upstart Nano out of the subcontinent. The loin-clad should not be allowed to pollute the common airs that circulate the globe.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Obama, even Edwards, rather than Billary, charming as half of that entity remains. Too bad that Dennis is “short” in stature? and that Richardson is belatedly “righteous” in re the Establishment.
80-20 is a PAC, not a social club where everyone is treated fairly and nicely. Do you want things good for our community done? Or do you want to be nice to all and let them walk all over you?
Political Action Committee deals in rewarding politicians that work for us and punishing those who work against us. Clear and simple. We are not partisan. It’d be foolish to give Republicans equal time while you are dealing with the Democratic Primary, wouldn’t it? It would be equally foolish to endorse all Democratic candidates when you want just one of them to win, wouldn’t it?
Will everyone just look at 80-20’s website? 99% of their front page material is dedicated to attacking ONE candidate for the Presidency! Tell me is that looks like “NON-PARTISAN” advocacy. Come on, you don’t have to be a politically savvy activist to know that their tactics reeks of hypocrisy and partisanship! Will 80-20 prove to us that they are indeed “non-partisan” and will equally “punish and reward” politicians….and launch similar vicious attack campaigns on every single Republican candidate who all have also so far absolutely refused to answer their Questionnaire????
I came from the famed Bell Laboratories, and I used to hear all kinds of “intellectual” arguments why Asian Americans were good in their technical contributions, but were just not good for management. That would not happen if there were concrete performance evaluation measurements. Yet, we were great in coming up with performance measurement schemes to increase the efficiencies of the operations of the Bell Systems, from operators helping customers to repair service answering outages. The motto was simply, “if you cannot measure a service performance, it is not worth designing that service”.
We all know that politicians makes promises, especially those that cannot be measured or be accountable after being elected. Asian Americans do not need more promises or platitude for having been civil-rights minded; all 80-20 is asking is to sign in concrete stone simple six questions that will give Asian Americans equal opportunity and justice for advancement under the same performance system. So, why are there so many claimed Asian American Obama supporters that are attacking 80-20, when Sen. Obama can simply sign the six questions, affirmatively? As claimed by his supporters, his past civil rights accomplishments and his minority candidacy would make Asian Americans proud. I even agree with that, only if he would simply sign the six questions affirmatively!
David
It is hard to say which candidate stands out from the crow. Since none of them have done anything extraordinary for Asian-Pacific Americans.
We cannot go by what they claim they going to do. We have to look at what they have put in and continue putting in. Past predicts future. Clinton had some media clash w/ Asian reporters.
Having Obama makes minority closer to become president. That doesn’ mean we get the policies favor us.
It saddens me to see Asian Americans attacking each other over the issue of Obama vs. Clinton. The fact is they are both excellent candidates for the Presidency.
For my money I’d go with Senator Clinton who has signed in writing her promise to bring equality and justice to all Asian Americans. For the life of me, I don’t understand why Senator Obama has refused on many occasion to pledge in writing his willingness to bring basic civil rights to Asian Americans.
We have gone way pass the threshold of accepting “trust me, a close relative of mine is Chinese American”.
Senator Obama, sign on the dotted line and I will support you.
Joel in California
Emil,
We are with you!!!! I liked Obama and was going to support him. Unfortunately, all the nice talk about “working for” Asian American causes don’t mean a damn thing in light of these facts:
1) His inaction over a 6-month period on the 80-20 questionnaire and refusal to engage in good faith negotiations.
2) He is lawyer and he KNOWS how he can get away with nice words that cannot be measured and held accountable! There is a big difference between “I promise to help you financially and I promise to give you $65,000” Just $1 would satisfy the first commitment.
3) He refused to sign even AFTER Clinton and Edwards have signed, proving he is totally insincere about Asian Americans’ plight.
I say, “Enough of his great phony Oratory!!” I for one am going into the voting booth with my mind clearer and my eyes wide open. We CANNOT support someone who does not support us.
Ono in LAX
You know, I got the emails from 80-20 too, and wasn’t sure what the hoopla is all about with Obama. Somebody in an earlier post said that there are very specific reasons why Obama didn’t answer the questionnaire. I looked into the links and it basically boils down to wording that implies quotas, which is unconstituional.
If that’s the only issue, I don’t understand why the Obama camp is still refusing to answer the questionnaire. Digging out the last several messages from 80-20, it looks like they have already changed the wording to remove any implications of quotas whatsoever. If anything the last open letter bends over backwards way too far if you ask me. What’s so objectionable about signing such an innocuous document for Obama?
Once upon a time I was all ga-ga for Obama too but now I don’t know. More and more he looks like just another politician beholden to all kinds of special interests. If he doesn’t have the backbone to stand up to them and do something so unobjectionable, how is he going to clean up the mess in Iraq?
I roll my eyes at all the rapturous tire-pumping for Obama. Please. If you want to be in the messianic business, go join a cult. All we can expect from our politicians is decency and competency. Obama is probably decent. His competency OTOH is completely unproven. It’s not like he’s going to take the Tennis Court Oath if he gets in - you wouldn’t want that anyway, the last time they rolled out the guillotines pretty quick after taking the Tennis Court Oath.
well, it looks like the 80/20 staff have found their way to this article. -Very suspicious that 6 Anti-Obama posts are posted on the same day, -all hitting the same talking points (repeating the whole “Obama didn’t respond for 6 months) and an overuse of caps and exclamation points.
Honestly, I don’t know what to make of this entire issue. To me, it doesn’t make any sense that a politician would deliberately ignore or offend an advocacy group. There has to be more to it than what is being shouted about here. The truth most likely is somewhere in the middle.
I must say though, that this “scorched earth” attitude by 80/20 strikes me as a somewhat extreme and a bit unprofessional. I think Email needs to do some more research and find out what’s really going on rather than solely relying on 80/20 for information.
I’m the administrator of the http://www.AsianAmericansforObama.com website and the founder of the related organization.
I want to make sure that everyone is clear that Asian Americans for Obama is an independent grassroots group that supports Sen. Obama’s election. We do NOT represent the official views of the Obama campaign. For the official Obama AAPI website, visit http://aapi.barackobama.com. Any information or statement from the campaign that we post or provide, we obtain by asking campaign staff, which anybody is free to do.
To address some of the points some have made, I urge you to evaluate Sen. Obama’s record on AAPI issues independently. Whether it’s our organization or 80-20, ultimately, you must make your decision not based on what other people say is reality, but what facts you can discover for yourself.
In my two posts responding to 80-20 on the Asian Americans for Obama website linked in the second comment above, I have attempted to offer some of these facts. As I stated, when I went to law school in Chicago and Sen. Obama was still teaching there, I had the opportunity to see his work as a state senator and see what he was like as a person. Every Asian American community leader I knew in Chicago spoke highly of Sen. Obama’s commitment to AAPI issues throughout his career, and how he was a reliable, unwavering voice for AAPI concerns in the Illinois State Senate. If you want to know what he has done for Asian Americans, look at his legislative record. Talk to Asian American leaders in Illinois who have been working with him for years. Talk to his US Senate Chief of Staff and Legislative Director, who are both of APA descent. Talk to my friend and law school classmate Priya Bhattia, who heads the Chicago chapter of South Asians for Obama. Look at his policy platform for AAPIs. Look at the fact that he has more resources devoted specifically to the AAPI community of any of the major presidential candidates.
To offer one example, one of the questions that Obama supposedly refused to answer was about appointing Article III judges (federal judges). Woo implies that not answering the question means Obama is not committed to this principle. Yet in fall 2005 at the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association National Convention in Chicago, Sen. Obama gave a speech where he specifically mentioned the need to fight for more APA judges on the federal bench (as well as issuing a call to APAs to be more actively involved in electoral politics). I know that because I was there.
The problem with 80-20 is not that they criticize Sen. Obama, but the manner in which they have done it. First of all, it is completely irresponsible, not to mention a logical fallacy, to argue that to refuse to answer a questionnaire from one APA organization means that Obama must not care about APAs. Even if the charge were true, there are plenty of other reasons why someone might refuse that have nothing at all to do with their position on APAs. Second of all, the sheer vitriol of the rhetoric is disheartening. If Sen. Obama were David Duke, that may be understandable. But to attack a proven progressive who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii as some kind of anti-Asian racist is terribly misleading. (I also think one shouldn’t underestimate the value of having lived abroad for being able to empathize with first generation immigrants who know what it’s like to live somewhere besides America.)
Ultimately, if we get bogged down with the details of what exactly was said between the two camps, we’ll never resolve the issue since none of us were there. Rather than obsessively parsing the meaning of a tussle over one questionnaire, wouldn’t all of us be better served by spending that time researching the known facts, the record, and talking to the people in positions to know most about what Obama has done over the years, especially before he was nationally known? I know the Asian American community is more sophisticated than to just take their cues from one organization, no matter how hard working or successful in the past. Just like the black community knows that Farrakhan, Sharpton, Jackson, Bond, Mfume, etc. each speak for themselves and their organizations, not necessarily the community as a whole.
I’ve gone to talks with S.B. Woo. I’ve even had the opportunity to chat with him a few times. I interned at OCA when 80-20 was just starting up, and he was working with organizations such as OCA on the project. One of his relatives went to college with me. He’s done a lot of things worth admiring and applauding. But that does not mean he has earned the right to be the final say on every issue or claim that his views represent the interests and perspectives of all Asian Americans.
Ramey Ko
Asian Americans for Obama
http://www.AsianAmericansforObama.com
PS - For all those who seem to think Sen. Obama is a “phony,” I went to the University of Chicago Law School while he was still teaching there. This was before anyone outside of Chicago had even heard his name; in fact, when he first ran for US Senate, his name ID was low even in Chicago outside his state senate district. I can guarantee you that Sen. Obama was exactly the person then that you see on TV now. His warmth, kindness, and passion were clear to everyone, and if you ask any of the faculty members, including our famously libertarian Law & Economics folks who probably disagree with Obama on almost everything, he was the same 15 years ago as he is today. His students always gave him glowing evaluations, and he was one of the most popular teachers at school. My friends who took the last class he taught, Race and the Law, in winter quarter of 2003-2004, which was in the thick of the highly competitive Democratic primary, said that despite his campaign, he never missed office hours and met with each of them individually to work on their papers for the class. I was recently told a story by someone here in Austin about going to see Obama when he was doing his book tour in 2006. After he spoke, he spent twenty minutes chatting with this woman and her friends. One of them suddenly collapsed, and Sen. Obama stayed by this woman’s side, refused letting security guards take him aside until the paramedics arrived, and prayed for the woman along with her friends. This man is the real deal, folks. All you have to do is talk to people who know him personally. Even his political adversaries in Illinois have nothing but the best things to say about his character and his person.
Just wanted to add two comments:
1) If you are already registered to vote and declined to state an affiliation, you can actually show up on registration day and ask for a democratic ballot but if you’re a permanent absentee voter, you must request an absentee democratic primary ballot from your county office of elections. You do not have to change your affiliation. From the CA elections page: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_decline.htm#primary
2) Also, just wanted to amend my post because a friend pointed out to me that John Edwards does have an AAPI issues page. I missed it because it isn’t visible from the main homepage, but it can be accessed if you click on issues and then scroll to the bottom of the page. http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/aapi/
The following might as well be 80-20’s NEW “Mission”
“80-20 is a national, a highly partisan, Political Action Committee dedicated to discriminately singling out one candidate from the Democratic party to Swift-Boat through an all out campaign, ideally directing 80% of our community’s votes and money to other presidential candidates favored by the 80-20, who promised through our Questionnaires that they will better represent the interests of a few of our visionary 80-20 leaders only. Hence, “80-20″ was created,” and no one can touch us now. And, we won’t back down from our playbook until at least the majority of Asian Americans are made fools out of this issue.”
Curiouser and curiouser, but:
1: To the observation that both Clinton and Obama are fine candidates, true for domestic issues, but false for foreign affairs, as in the fact that Clinton has never renounced her public record as “Lieberman Lite.”
I don’t know about anyone else, but this APA perch believes that larger issues trump smaller ones.
2: Which leads to the fact that “minority” claims and rights must subserve that of the “whole,” i.e., this nation and this republic, now suffering under a military/industrial oligarchy to rival that of the Kaiser AND Hitler.
3: Yes, 80/20 is a “political action committee,” and so is AIPAC. And so, also, are ALL those self-serving lobbies that brook no quarter and care nothing about the common weal.
4: If one judges another by his “enemies,” then one would have to side with Obama, who should carefully watch his back if he continues to challenge those in power and those who subserve them. Remember the Kennedys AND MLK. These guys think nothing of authentic genocides, so why would they draw the line at simple assassinations? Bennett? even can out openly to “terminate” Hugo Chavez.
5: If, as reported, Obama refused to “guarantee” posts and appointments to “blacks,” why in the world should he do so for APAs?
6: The 80/20 “campaign” to stop Obama sounds to me as if said PAC is either complicit with or identifies with the Clinton camp for continuing “middle-of-the-road” acquiescence or submission to the warmongers, who, appartently, include a majority of the “Denicratic Party.”
Prognosis: Things are going to get worse, for EVERYone, other than the oligarchs, that is. The CEO of Countrywide is retiring under a golden parachute of- a mere 40-mil, whilst supermarket prices for daily needs skyrocket to hunger levels.
Frank Eng
P.S.: And even Obama may be able to do little to stem this tide of birds come home to roost: humiliation overseas and recession domestically
Obama reminds me of Elaine Chiao, our not-beloved Asian American Labor Secretary, who has done nothing to advance Asian American rights in workplace except having an Asian face and an Asian surname. People like these, obstruct, rather than advance, Asian American causes because they are afraid to offend their white constituency. They play the minority card to get the minority support, but play the majority card to stay in office. How pathetic! If you can not stand Chiao, you sure won’t be able to stomach Obama!
Hillary is a minority, but is not afraid to speak for minority, despite doing so might cost her votes. I love her Presidential courage, which Obama is sorely lacking!
Frank, you get bonus points from me for managing to integrate the Jeffersonian term “common weal” into an online conversation.
Emil,
It is absolutely appalling the complete lack of research that went into your op-ed article. If you had read the exact questionnaire that was sent to Obama, you’d realize that 80-20 was actually trying to politically bully power for 80-20 specifically, and not for the general interests of the AAPI community.
As an Asian American putting myself in Obama’s shoes reading the questionnaire, I wouldn’t have signed it either. I would not have been comfortable with the fact that the questionnaire explicitly says I would have to appoint people decided solely by 80-20/SB Woo.
As someone who has been receiving the 80-20 newsletter for almost 9 years now, the recent unstable missives from this organization has left a bad taste with me.
-drew
Kelvin, one question: On what basis are you making the claim that Obama would not do anything for minority rights? Can you point to any specific stated policies or comments that would indicate this? Or are you basing this claim solely on whole 80/20 questionairre?
I believe the leaders of 80-20 have genuinely good intentions for the APA community. However, they need to stop and consider whether they are truly accomplishing their originally stated mission by pursuing this ill-guided call to defeat Obama. As of now, they are doing more harm than good by: 1) Arguing on Faulty Logic, 2) Representing Themselves Unprofessionally, and 3) Failing their Own Mission by Dividing APA Democrats
1. 80-20’s Fuzzy Logic
80-20’s primary argument seems to be: “Hillary & Edwards said Yes to our very reasonable survey, but Obama did not say Yes. Therefore, Obama will never support equal opportunity for APA’s and he must be defeated.”
However, 80-20 fails to show any evidence that Obama approved similar surveys submitted to him for support of Latino, Black, Disabled, LGBT or any other communities. Without such evidence, they cannot prove that Obama intentionally neglected 80-20 and APA issues over other groups. Likewise, it is quite possible that Hillary and Edwards answered affirmatively to all surveys from various advocacy groups, regardless of content. After extensively comparing Obama to his political opponents, 80-20 must also measure itself against other organizations and advocacy groups who approached these candidates.
80-20 also ignores the possibility that Obama could still support equal opportunities for APA’s even if he did not answer the survey, as if preclusion of their questionnaire amounted to an ironclad commitment to eternal inequality. Nor do they recognize the potential for Hillary and Edwards to renege on their promises, as if no President ever did that (”Read my lips, anyone”?). 80-20’s entire argument is logically faulty.
2. 80-20’s Unprofessional Representation
Also, Obama might have perceived 80-20 as a non-legitimate organization, and the 80-20 leaders could be responding angrily to his candidacy because of a bruised ego. If they ever want to be taken seriously, 80-20 needs to realize how unprofessional they come across to others, for these two reasons.
A. Fraudulent Email Subscriptions
First, 80-20 must stop copying and pasting email addresses from private messages and conversations, in order to subscribe these people, unwittingly, to the 80-20 mailing-list. The 80-20 website does not even have a text box to enter one’s email address and subscribe to their mailing list, because it is apparently unnecessary. This practice of increasing their exposure and outreach is unprofessional, invasive and disrespectful to the “700,000 supporters” who suddenly found themselves on the 80-20 mailing list without ever initiating any contact. The only reason I never spam-blocked the 80-20 emails is because I felt they pursued worthwhile goals, until this “Defeat Obama” fiasco.
B. Poor Grammar & Etiquette
Second, if 80-20 truly wishes to represent the community, a simple course in email etiquette would help people take them more seriously. The overused red font, boldtype and exclamation points are textbook errors that reveal their inexperience and crudeness. The messages are long-winded, structurally unsound and rife with grammatical errors. Such poor communication skills are not indicative of a professionally run organization and I can only surmise that other Democratic candidates took them seriously out of desperation to be in their good graces.
3. 80-20’s Failed Mission
Finally, 80-20’s proposed solution of defeating Obama to demonstrate the power of our APA voting bloc is immature and departs from its own declared goal of uniting an 80% voting bloc. Indeed, the APA community must show that we can make an impact on the political process and be the crucial swing vote that will bring us much-deserved attention. Threatening a single candidate, however, with a concerted effort to defeat him in the primaries for not answering their questionnaire, is a primitive retort and obvious grasp for attention. Although I am sure it has gained them much publicity and website traffic in the short run, 80-20’s controversial attempt to assert power is irrational without proof that Obama’s campaign treats them differently from other organizations.
If leaders in 80-20 and the APA community truly want to mobilize and make a long-term impact, our efforts would be better suited towards registering more young APA’s (who are skewing progressive) and pushing us all Democratic in November to defeat whichever candidate the Republicans support. I think 80-20’s own response on their website FAQ #8 says it best: “If we want to see the best results — getting people in both parties working diligently for us beginning today, we must endorse a party not a candidate.” (boldtype added) http://www.80-20initiative.net/faq/long.asp#8
Brian Wang
bwang1@gmail.com
(these views are my own and do not represent those of the organizations I belong to)
Randy, What’s holding Obama back from singing the 80-20 questionnaire, which Clinton, Edwards, Dobb, Bidden, and Richardson have all signed, except that he has no intention of righting the wrongs for Asian Americans? Can you find another logical answer? If this questionnaire is unfit for signing, then the other 5, all having much more experience than Obama, must have a “0″ IQ. Don’t be fooled by skin color, look at the facts.
The fact remains that 80-20 is totally focused and undeterred on defeating one candidate, a Democrat, only. Their current website exists soley as a ANTI-Obama” website (99% of the front page content is evident enough). THIS is a direct contradiction to it’s very existence as a so-called “non-partisan” group, and trying speaking for “all Asian Americans?”
Let’s get REAL folks!
OF COURSE Obama is not promising to give Blacks federal jobs! Blacks have benefitted not only from EO11246, they have one better: Affirmative Action. They are heavily represented in government and judiciary. They even have one on the supreme court. Does the fact that we don’t even have 1 Asian out of 179 federal appellate judges mean ANYTHING to you? A decent politician helps the oppressed and clearly disadvantaged (that’s us) and he is not afraid to do the right thing.
If Obama does not like the 80-20 Questionnaire, why didn’t he make a counter proposal?? What is he afraid of that the other Democratic candidates are not? Open you eyes! If Obama is not willing to commit in writing to help Asian Americans, he is not sincere about helping us.
Ono
AsianWeek is a narrow-minded Bay-centric newspaper who has the gall to claim that it is the “Voice of Asian America”. It’s no wonder that Emil thinks that one man’s crusade for his own personal glory passes as a political movement worthy of printing. Oh, I forgot, this is the same paper that ran a column called “Why I Hate Black People”. Maybe the 80-20 diatribe against Obama is SB Woo’s thinly disguised version, and AsianWeek is yet again a willing enabler in getting the message out.
Brian, 80-20 may not be perfect, but if you know a better alternative, please let me know. The fact that most Democratic candidates have signed 80-20’s questionnaire, except for Obama, is already an achievement in itself. If Asian Americans can unite, we can teach Obama a lesson, and all politicians will learn that snubbing Asian Americans is not a wise thing to do. Why worry about tactics, as long as the purpose is achieved?
To Kelvin: You didn’t answer my question. You cannot point to any statements, positions, or policies by Obama that would indicate he does not support Asian American representation and rights. Your entire argument is based on this *ONE* questionnaire. 80/20 can’t even release a press statement without misspellings and typos. And all of the 80/20 anti-Obama folks here seem to be extremely immature and hyper-reactive.
I am entirely open to a logical argument against Obama if you can point to anything BESIDES this questionnaire that would indicate a lack of support for Asian Americans.
Also, did it ever occur to you that the other candidates responded to the questionnaire to get a easy recommendation from 80/20?? i.e. “yeah, yeah sure whatever you say, we’ll sign it. Thanks for your support!”
If anything, Obama’s refusal to sign the questionnaire shows a lot of INTEGRITY. He’s not going to sign anything just to get an easy endorsement.
I throw an open challenge to ALL anti-Obama people here to point to ONE statement, policy or decision that would indicate he does not support Asian American rights. I am open-minded on this and can be convinced if somebody makes an intelligent, LOGICAL argument that does not rely on one questionnaire given by a group of immature people who can’t even spellcheck their own press releases.
A quintupler here.
To three, only one of whom is semi-named, to wit, Kelvin, Midwesterner AND Westcoaster.
For the latter two, why are you afraid to post your name?? Emil, at the very least, openly and fearlessly acknowledges HIS.
And to the outnumbered twain, Randy and Brian Wang, I am particularly impressed with the latter’s thoughtful input, along with everyone else who has been moved to speak out and up — BRAVO !
After initial doubts and hesitancy, this octogenarian has arrived at the point of subjective decision:
Barack Obama is our best and only hope for an America that is worth fighting for.
Tonight, I even got a phone call purporting to be from RFK Jr., plumping for Billary.
That sealed it for me.
I had thought Bobby’s scion had properly thanked Hugo Chavez for the latter’s largesse the past winter or two, and was among the first to denounce the oiligopolies for their poisonous leavings at the headwaters of the Amazon.
The Establishment HAS to be fearful for its perks and privileges AND “power.”
A Vegas judge has okayed Strip casino caucuses, and if Obama, whose young proponents have been ringing my old phone off the hook, wins Nevada yet, can the Golden State be far behind?
That is, if the fearful and the greedy do not prevail once more, regardless of race, class, or creed.
In which event, I urge, once more, extraordinary security, in this case, for real, precautions for the candidate of “hope,” and “uniting,” and “CHANGE.”
Frank Eng
P.S.: I coiuld be wrong, again as usual, but methinks both “Midwesterner” and “Westcoaster” originated from the identical keypad and p.c., probably some fringe or “minority” “swiftboater” who is paid for the smear job.
Response to 80-20 from Obama AAPI Leaders
Dear S.B. Woo,
In response to your “Open Letter from the Asian Am Community” to Senator Barack Obama, we are sending this letter to address some apparent misunderstandings and misconceptions.
As key supporters of the Obama campaign, we can assure you that the campaign is committed to reaching out to the Asian American community. The Senator has created an Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) National Leadership Council comprised of key AAPI leaders and activists from throughout the country to advise the campaign on identifying AAPI issues of concern and outreach. The campaign has provided an official statement of support and commitment to the Asian American Action Fund (AAA Fund). In fact, the AAA Fund of Greater Chicago has formally endorsed Senator Obama’s candidacy. The campaign has sent top surrogates to address the AAPI community’s concerns and their needs at candidate forums sponsored by Asian Pacific Americans for Progress (APAP) and the AAA Fund. The Senator, himself, emphasized his support of Asian Americans with his message of diversity through unity during his participation in the Iowa Heartland Presidential Forum. The campaign has outlined a comprehensive plan to reclaim the American Dream for Asian American and Pacific Islander families. Barack Obama is the only candidate to have a campaign-sponsored Asian American outreach webpage linked off of its main website.
In an effort to further reach out to the AAPI community, the Obama campaign attempted to establish a dialogue with you regarding the 80-20 Educational Foundation’s questionnaire in December 2007. On Friday, December 14, 2007, Obama campaign staff had engaged in a phone conversation with you to discuss concerns regarding the wording of the questionnaire. The staff members had requested you to consider changes to questions 4 and 5, both of which relate to appointing AAPI judges, because of concerns that the questions implied a de facto quota. As you are aware, Senator Obama is a strong supporter of affirmative action and enhancing opportunities for Asian Americans, but he is a staunch opponent of the quota systems. The staff members requested that you consider modifying the wording of those questions to resemble the wording of question 6, which addresses considering qualified AAPIs for the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, you refused to consider modifications of the questions, and refused our request to explore other alternatives that would allow the Obama campaign to submit the completed questionnaire to the members of 80-20. In response to the 80-20 questionnaire as written, the Obama campaign did send you a letter confirming Senator Obama’s commitment to the enhancement of representation of Asian Americans in the federal judiciary system and ensuring equal opportunity in the workplace for not only Asian Americans, but for all Americans. Apparently, that was not acceptable to you.
Since that conversation, we have been greatly disturbed by emails that were circulated from you to your membership, which included false statements regarding your communications or lack of communications with the Obama staff. 80-20’s emails have made untrue allegations as to the reasons why the Obama campaign has not submitted “Yes” or “No” answers to the questionnaire. 80-20’s emails have also unfairly targeted and ridiculed Senator Obama and his motivations for his run to the Presidency. The emails have reflected untrue claims regarding the roles of the Senator’s family members and supporters and their participation in the campaign. The allegations through your ongoing emails to your membership continue to be false and misleading. We ask that you to refrain from circulating untrue and unsubstantiated statements about the Senator, his family members, campaign supporters, and the Obama campaign staff.
We encourage you, in the spirit of cooperation, to consider the changes the campaign requested in December or work with the campaign to find acceptable alternatives. We hope that 80-20 will rescind its Defeat Obama campaign. We do not understand why 80-20 has targeted Senator Obama and his candidacy even after the Obama campaign had attempted in good faith to establish a dialogue with 80-20. Other Democratic candidates at the time, including Governor Richardson and Congressman Kucinich, had not responded to the questionnaire, nor had any of the Republican candidates and yet none of them were targeted with a specific and deliberate campaign to defeat their candidacies.
The Obama campaign pledges to continue to reach out to the Asian American community and recognizes the importance of contributions made by the members of the AAPI community to the growth and success of our country. We look forward to further strengthening our dialogue and position with the AAPI community in addressing their issues of concern and needs throughout this campaign. We are proud of the diverse coalition that has been built to support Barack Obama’s campaign for President, and we certainly encourage organizations like 80-20 to stand with us in our mission to affect positive change for our country.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
Nancy Chen, IL.
Former APA Outreach Director for the Office of Presidential Personnel (1996-1997) and Former Chicago Director for Senator Paul Simon (D–IL) (1991-1996); Co-chair, Obama AAPI National Leadership Council
Ann Lata Kalayil, IL.
Former DNC At-Large Member and APIA Caucus; Co-Chair, Obama AAPI National Leadership Council
Stanley M. Toy, Jr. M.D., CA.
Chairman, Los Angeles County Hospital and Healthcare Delivery Commission and President and CEO TEAM Healthcare; Former Deputy National Finance Chair for Kerry-Edwards 2004, DNC Delegate-at-Large 2004, Member, Kerry National Leadership Council; Co-Chair, Obama AAPI National Leadership Council
Asian Americans should consider voting Republican instead of Democrat. Asian Americans are relatively financially well off, so Republican policies such as lower taxes, should benefit Asians more.
“Hock”:
What a double-whammy here!
“We” are rich, so we should vote ourselves richer?
To Hell! with everyone else? Not to mention the republic itself AND the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
You have managed to go the theoneocons one better, no, make that worse. Much worse.
You have added insult to injury.
Frank Eng
More than 30 Asian American artists, filmmakers and activists, including actress Kelly Hu, Yul Kwon, Eric Byler and Annabel Park are in Las Vegas this weekend to support Barack Obama and promote Asian Pacific American participation in Saturday’s historic Nevada Caucus.
Byler and Park will be creating videos about Obama and documenting campaign activities and events for the group’s YouTube channel (www.YouTube.com/UnitedForObama), which has already posted videos featuring Hu and Kal Penn.
Byler and Park are also board members of APA for Progress, which organized the AAPI team in Las Vegas. APAP has endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, but has also invited volunteers to support any Democratic candidate, as well as the non-partisan group APIAVote, which is seeking to increase APA turnout at the caucuses.
Along with canvassing for Obama today, Hu, Kwon, Byler, Park and others will be attending APIAVote phone-banking, a non-partisan effort to get AAPIs out to participate.
Also blogging at http://nv.apaforobama.com are:
Catherine Park
Curtis Chin
Angelica Jongco
Jenn Fang
Jenn Pae
See a mobile blog of the efforts, including
YouTube videos of Kelly Hu and Kal Penn at
http://nv.apaforobama.com
Obama people are still confused as to what questionnaire 80-20 sent them. So they made up their own version. They are SOoo absolutely disorganized! Not surprising at all.
westcoaster, to respond to your question about a better alternative, I am restating the last paragraph of my earlier posting:
If leaders in 80-20 and the APA community truly want to mobilize and make a long-term impact, our efforts would be better suited towards registering more young APA’s (who are skewing progressive) and pushing us all Democratic in November to defeat whichever candidate the Republicans support. I think 80-20’s own response on their website FAQ #8 says it best: “If we want to see the best results — getting people in both parties working diligently for us beginning today, we must endorse a party not a candidate.” (boldtype added) http://www.80-20initiative.net/faq/long.asp#8
All these Obama supporters would love 80-20 if it endorsed Obama. But if they don’t get their way, they make a big fuss about it. 80-20 doesn’t represent all Asian Americans. But it’s the best thing we have so far. You can find every excuse in the book why Obama didn’t sign onto 80-20’s commitment. The fact is he refuses to sign on, while Clinton and Edwards have. Obama may be full of nice words, but the question is “where’s the beef?”
Well said, CC. Indeed, where’s the beef? Back up the sweet words with REAL promise.
Lets’ pause and reflect on the silliness of the central challenge of Obama supporters above which is “Prove that Obama will not help us when he becomes President.”
Well, can anyone prove that there is NOT a little saucer and teacup revolving somewhere around the universe? Or (prove now) that I won’t pay you $5 next year? How else can you be sure if you don’t have a written statement from me saying that I’d indeed pay you $5?
The whole idea of bloc voting and political solidarity is to POOL our otherwise few votes to make a political difference. Why would we want to support someone who has no good reason not to sign the same damn questionnaire that seasoned veterans like Clinton, Edwards, Biden, etc. have signed?
Those who delude themselves into believing that Obama’s not signing is a sign of character would also have to accept that early American presidents before civil rights were similarly outstanding human beings because they refuse to cater to the special interests of the blacks hoping to sit at the front of the bus or even entering a white university. Please wake up! Do you see the folly of your ways?
Contrary to what one person said, none of the politicians can take the promises of commitment to 80-20 (and for that matter to any other special interest group) in a cavalier manner. It will come back to haunt them if they fail to deliver. I’ll bet you that’s why 80-20 presented their case in the form of a questionnaire to be answered only yes/no.
It is quite clear to me why 80-20 is targeting Obama:
1) He refuse to commit to the same advancement in Asian rights as the other candidates did
2) He is a leading candidate and will compete directly with other candidates who support us.
3) In order to support the candidate(s) who support our cause, we have to help defeat those who don’t.
That’s pretty clear, isn’t it? Think about it.
It’s becoming more and more clear to me as I think about it. I think the folks at 80-20 really know what they are doing, and when I study the questionnaire, I don’t see a damn shred of evidence to indicate they (80-20) have anything private to gain. It is for all of us, even as some of us are kicking it in the shin while it tries to lift us from the tar pits of inequality.
I am so taken aback by the unilateral, forceful, combative, and frankly, “bullying” behaviors coming out of 80-20, including their very board members who feel they must exert their authority (or more like, control) on the issue, on every blog on the internet.
I’m not sure if they’ve thought about it, but their one-track minded attack campaign on Obama is starting to look like an organization’s desperate attempt for attention, any attention. Or, perhaps they just want to be relevant and respected as THE major Asian American political force. The former is a given, but if anyone really wants to truly fight and win for the causes of all Asian Americans, they actually have to earn that right as the latter.
Unfortunately for 80-20, I’m afraid their actions, if the current issues is any indication, have already shown that they will and are capable of using any means necessary, even if the methods are misleading, false, divisive, damaging, or negative.
I truly hope I am wrong. But with their continued and relentless attacks operating at full speed, one is left to wonder how much more poisonous our entire Asian American political landscape can get before we are any closer to our common goals.
The leaders at 80-20initiative have painstakingly provided the facts and explanations, in as clear a manner as possible, for the PAC’s endorsement.
Yet, they are being attacked with innuendos of “secret agenda”, “poison”, etc.
Some people are simply too thick-skulled to understand 80-20’s simple, direct statements.
The vehemence with which these people attack the 80-20 organization and its leaders, despite the convincingly clear and simple statements and arguments issued by 80-20 ( which are there in 80-20’s website for anyone to review), makes me suspect that these attackers are either brainless or have their own secret agendas.
With such people, no amount of logical argumentation will do any good.
It is laughable that one of them even attack the minor grammatical errors in one of 80-20’s statements. “Poisoning the political landscape”, indeed!
[…] and 80-20 I urge you to evaluate Sen. Obama’s record on AAPI issues independently (“Why is Obama Snubbing Asian Americans?” Emil Amok, Jan. […]
Hey James, I don’t mind your direct reference to me. No lame pretense required here. On with the issue.
You obviously don’t see any contradiction in 80-20’s “non-partisan” partisanship, therefore anyone who raises questions about 80-20’s vicious and unfounded attacks on one Democratic candidate is now to blame, as non other than “attackers?” Wow, Asian American reactions (such as mine) against a “non-partisan” group’s formal, public, blatant and strategic attack on a candidate with a large following of AAPIs…are suddenly, “brainless or have their own secret agendas?”
Why do you insult yourself and all of us as such? Do you mean that, for instance, any Asian American who supports Barack Obama (as suggested by the Board of 80-20) must somehow themselves be just as anti-Asian American, because after all, they couldn’t get Obama to sign some poorly written questionnaire for 80-20?
Really? Asian American Domecratic political activists (too many to name here) are actively seeking to prevent ourselves from being treated with equality as proposed by 80-20 Questionnaire? Wow, now is this the “secret agendas” you’re referring to?
Sophia, please tell me if my eyes are fooling me or not, but the vast majority of the information on 80-20’s front page of their website happens to be about defeating one presidential candidate, Barack Obama. So much for “Republicans for 80-20″ and other such lies like “Independents for 80-20.” If you ask me, it’s more like, “80-20, a partisan organization with the sole agenda against only one Obama candidate.”
Please refute those simple facts for me. Oops, I just saw that 80-20 just took like 75% of their front page attack materials OFF their main webpage.
Interesting development, I must say!
Has anybody on the 80-20 staff actually ever spoken to Obama himself? Or is this just a case of competing staff members having a pissing contest?
For all we know, Obama doesn’t even know about this questionaire or it was never brought to his attention. Rather than conducting a scorched-earth compaign against the guy, perhaps it would be prudent to actually have a conversation with the person you are willing to go against.
I’m quite sure that at least Dr. Edward Lin, Dr. S.B. Woo, or Kathleen To have talked to Sen. Obama themselves, and after listening to him explain himself, decided that he just needs to be defeated, no matter what.
Of course.
People with high integrity usually have themselves well-covered before any such pre-meditated campaigns. I would air on 80-20 having solid evidence that Obama has indeed proven himself to quite an Anti-Asian American candidate, and therefore must be defeated at all cost…save the Republicans.
I’m disappointed in this article’s tone, and I was disappointed to read that 80/20 has decided to support Clinton. I read through Obama’s letter response to them, and he details carefully his support of Asian Americans, and I can say that I am more impressed with the fact that he actually has his own viewpoint and approach to minority issues (which he has clearly acted on in his history), as opposed to Clinton and the other candidates, who have allowed viewpoints to be dictated to them, and then signed ‘yes’, in what is clearly a politically serving approach to the situation. - From an educated Asian American female voting for Obama
If you look at 80-20’s website, not a single Republican candidate responded to their questionaire. And yet 80-20 is single-mindedly attacking Obama for not answering their questionaire.
That kind of behavior calls into question 80-20’s supposedly non-partison agenda. They’re starting to look more and more like Republican shills.
Also, 80-20 appears to have just recently redesigned their entire website to take all references to Obama off the front page of the site. For the past few weeks, almost every single article and link on the front page was devoted to “Defeat Obama!!!”. Somebody must have just noticed how ridiculous their site was becoming.
Here are the individuals at 80-20 personally responsible for ordering the unrelenting attacks on Obama:
President: Kathleen To (New Mexico)
Vice President: Amy Wong Mok (Texas)
Acting Secretary: Kim Song (Missouri)
Treasurer: Jing-Li Yu (New York)
Immediate Past President: S.B. Woo (Delaware)
Chair, Nomination Comm.: Linden Nishinaga (California)
Chair, Election Monitoring Comm: Yueh-Ting Lee (Ohio)
Kelvin Chen (California)
David Chai (California)
Hong-Yee Chiu (Maryland)
Laura Ling Hsu (Texas)
Joel Wong (California)
John Wong (California)
David Yang (California)
Frank Lee (California)
Edward Lin (Florida)
I’m sure their combined integrity as honorable Asian American activists are able to withstand any backlash resulting from their current actions…for the long haul.
I am extremely disappointed in 80/20, not only for their insistence on targeting the Obama campaign, but also for their unwillingness to recognize all the facts. It was the Obama campaign — not 80/20 — that revealed the conflict over the questionnaire’s wording. And it is the Obama campaign — not 80/20 — that is spreading malicious lies about Obama’s true stance on Asian American equal opportunity.
Senator Obama’s response letters are quite clear: he is for equal opportunities and equal employment for all Americans, including Asian Americans. However, he is concerned about the constitutionality of the questionnaire — a question of constitutionality that 80/20 refuses to address in a reasonable fashion.
Asian Americans forming a political coalition is a respectable goal. But to energize our base by lying to us with half-truths that suggest Obama is willfully working against Asian Americans is not only political game-playing, but is actually harmful and disrespectful of Asian American people, particularly immigrant Asian Americans who rely on the same non-English language newspapers for information that 80/20 is using to spread their misinformation.
For more information on 80/20, please visit my blog at http://www.reappropriate.com
80-20 officers have CLEARLY stated that the main goal of the organization is unity among Asian-Americans in order to show that this large minority group has political power, and therefore, the politicians must not continue to ignore our group.
I respect the intellectual arguments used by the Chicago Asian-American group who unfortunately support Obama’s candidacy, but I have nothing except contempt for the others
who vehemently attack 80-20 officers and members in a personal manner.
Who can those attackers be?
1. A. Non-Asian-Americans who have something to gain from the continued suppression of equal opportunities for Asian-Americans or who, for some other reason(s), fear the rise of political power of Asian-Americans.
B. People using Asian sounding names in order to fool others into thinking that they are Asian-Americans.
2. Asian-Americans who do not understand the goal of 80-20. Somebody please help them—again!
3. Asian-Americans who have been bought to betray their own ethnic group.
There ought to be a name for each of the above types of attackers. I’d like to suggest the following:
1. A. Opportunists,
B. Cowards,
2. Morons,
3. Traitors.
James, your post is patently ridiculous. As a Chinese-American, I take offense at your characterization that someone like me must either not understand 80-20’s goals or are “morons & traitors”.
I understand perfectly well what 80-20’s goals are, and in fact I support them. What I don’t support are their methods in regards to how they are attacking Obama. I also object to your simplistic “either you are with us or against us” absolutist mentality. Nobody elected you the representatives of Asian America. I sure as hell didn’t.
Answer this: Why is 80-20 singling out Obama when not a SINGLE Republican candidate bothered to answer the questionaire???
This is taken directly from the 80-20 website:
_____
Reply to the Questionnaire from the Republican candidate
No Response Yet: Mayor Rudy Giuliani (has a policy of not replying to questionnaires)
No Response Yet: Governor Mike Huckabee (According to Janice Cherry, Policy Director, the Huckabee campaign does not answer any questionnaires at this moment.)
No Response Yet: Congressman Duncan Hunter
No Response Yet: Senator John McCain
No Response Yet: Congressman Ron Paul
No Response Yet: Governor Mitt Romney
No Response Yet: Senator Fred Thompson (has a policy of not replying to questionnaires)
_____
http://www.80-20initiative.net/news/preselect2008.asp
So all of the Republican candidates either claimed they had a policy of not responding to questionaires or IGNORED 80-20’s questionaire altogether. And yet you’re focusing on Obama who actually responded to your request and was willing to have a dialogue with your group over the questionaire’s wording.
Your own website proves your group’s biases.
“unity among Asian-Americans” does not happen by decrees from 80-20’s top-down hierarchy. In fact, disunity is the direct result of 80-20’s actions. This Obama attack campaign will serve as concrete evidence of such disunity…promulgated by 80-20’s core leadership team.
James, your racist assumptions does not speak well for yourself, 80-20 or our Asian America.
James, no one disputes 80/20’s STATED goal; what is up for dispute is whether this group’s proven tactics are contradictory to that goal and/or harmful to the APIA community at large.
And as a highly-educated Chinese American, like Randy, I too am offended by your argument that anyone who speaks out against 80/20 is either a moron or a race traitor. It’s that kind of a divisive stance that works directly against 80/20’s stated mission to unite the community; there’s no room in your rhetoric for a reasonable person to have justified reasons to disagree with 80/20.
The way that the 80-20 questionnaire was written - and the approach that 80-20 used to make its point - reminded me so much of Hillary Clinton’s overall campaign strategy.
Like the Clinton camp, that questionnaire was full of gross assumptions, intentional manipulation of Obama’s record with the AAPI community, and smearing of his good name to try and win support.
And, like the Clinton campaign, because those with 80-20 didn’t get what they wanted, when they wanted it, the organization felt that the best approach to make their point - versus so many other more civil and equally effective ways to express their concerns - was to push Obama up against the wall with its “if you don’t respond, we therefore assume you are anti-AAPI and are going to round up our peeps and bring you down!”
In Chinese, we call people like that –> 小人.
I sincerely hope that 80-20 all along has the intention to support Hillary Clinton because I don’t know how the organization will recover from this if, in the end, they were hoping to support Obama.
One thing is for certain.
80-20 does not in any way represent me.
I am disgusted by people who can’t read, including those that claim to be highly educated.
Let me repeat (Just remember, repetition is needed only for those weak minds.):
I respect intellectual argumentation on the point of debate, but I dislike those that stray from the point and viciously/needlessly attack 80-20 officers or its members.
For instance (Again, examples are for weak minds.), some people are still questioning why 80-20 is not knocking Republican candidates.
If those that ask this question can read, they would shut up. There’s no point in answering questions from those that can’t read. Category 2.
This peculiar 80/20 matter is starting to smell like a sham opposition, meant to reduce the appearance that some citizens are ganging up against whites (80+20) %. Perhaps committee100 is in on this little Sun Tzuey charade. They approach Obama with demands they know will meet resistance, then have their sham foul to
cry about.
Why? Burning every bridge to the majority is a risky thing for tenuous minority.
Somebody watch the 80/20 heads and see who they really pull the levers for.
I believe that most people who are against 80-20 on this forum are blacks pretending to be Asians. But in case some Asians have not read the 80-20 website carefully, I like to offer the following my understanding about 80-20’s campaign:
1. Why 80-20 targets Obama only: He happens to be the only Democratic front-runner who refuses to answer the questionnaire but tries to fool us using sweet, non-measurable words. 80-20 says to keep neutral if Obama signs. If he signs, it is the best case for us: we get all front-runner’s written promises without attacking any body so that we can save our resources for the fight during the final.
In fact, by refusing to sign, Obama provides an ideal opportunity to show our political muscles during a close election race. The best result is that we see headlines like this “Clinton defeats Obama with a small margin and Asian’s votes are the key to win the Democratic Primary”. The worst case is that “Both candidates win 50% of Asian’s votes”. If the worst occurs, no one will sign anything anymore during the next election because he/she gains no advantage by paying some political price to sign such a questionnaire.
2. Why 80-20 doesn’t attack other democratic candidates who don’t sign: they will lose anyway. Our attacking will have no influence and will impress no one, but waste our limited resources.
3. Why 80-20 does not attack republicans now: they are equally “bad”, none of them signs. We only have limited cannons but there are too many targets on the republican side during the Primary. If 80-20 launches a campaign to attack the whole Republic Party, it is not bi-partisan any more. But 80-20 does say that republicans are not worth our support. We will attack the republican’s front-runner during the Final Election if he continues to refuse to sign.
4. What big deal the questionnaire is: It is a significant deal. In fact, Clinton hesitated to sign on the beginning because she was the first one asked to sign and had to pay some political prices. But the questionnaire reflects the core value of America, this is, the equal opportunity, so a candidate with integrity can not deny it. Martin Luther King’s dream had come true for African Americans long ago; with 12% population, they hold 20% managerial positions in governments, universities and industries. Our Asians are left far behind. It would be too naïve to expect Obama to promote Asian’s status. He is an inexperienced administrator on one hand and gets blacks to take care on the other hand. He has no record showing he has helped Asians and explicitly rejected our reasonable requests. Do not expect a miracle.
Dr. S B Wu is a political veteran, was elected and served as a Lieutenant Governor of the State of Delaware. He has given up opportunities of getting a federal appointment and President of University of Hong Kong, a big-buck position, in order to serve us (20-80 board members have to declare not to seek federal appointments). Also he is able to get both democrats and republicans sitting together in 80-20. He deserves our respect and trust. My fellow smart Asians, I urge you to trust him once.
Well, it seems “Jim Erbes” actually exists, and the above immediately foregoing “post” would so seem to indicate.
However, it also appears that now he no longer wishes to incite pogroms against Chinese? “merchant-class pigs,” but is assuming a new post at the gate of 700-thou, three-mil? minions of the “yellow peril” storming the “white” majority gates.
Pitiably laughable as that stance is, I want to remind ALL particvipants in the long and windy, winding?, kitetail of charge and countercharge, that, whereas you may well be open and honest and sincere in your postings, the likes of “Jim Erbes” should make you pause and consider the true “enemy,” those who find “yellow filth” at AsianWeek and who would love to see this venue closed and off-limits to ALL.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Besides, if you read Paul Craig Roberts or are truly thinking for yourselves, none of the above matters. Billary will win, or else the jackboots will march, and the rich will get filthier until their golden goose is demonstrably dead. People are so eager to be conned, from the official 9-11 take to band-aid recession remedies, and my personal suggestion is that each must find and make his/her own bed to lie in. Lay? That too.
But, please, make as certain as you can that the likes of Jim Erbes be cast into the void he obviously believes in.
Or, likely, he is simply non compos mentis. Like Dubya.
John Lynn, it is pretty silly for you to speculate that the people objecting to 80-20’s tactics are “Blacks pretending to be Asians”. Let me assure you, I am 100% Chinese American and can prove it in any number of ways if that’s where you want to take it.
Secondly, if Hillary Clinton answered yes to your original questionaire, then she is essentially making an empty promise since your original questionaire mandated quotas and quotas are illegal.
Thirdly, according to Obama’s letter that 80-20 has on your website, the 80-20 staff refused to work with them on changing the questionaire. At this point it’s a “you said-he-said” situation.
You are also essentially *lying* to your constituency by claiming that Obama is actively against Asian American empowerment. There are no statements by Obama nor any policy decisions or voting record that would support such a claim. ALL you have is this questionaire, -and we don’t even know what really happened since both sides are claiming different things.
I understand your post perfectly well. 80-20 is trying to gain power and credibility by fabricating an issue and galvanizing the Asian American community in the hopes that their votes may mean the difference in a closely contested contest.
The problem is: the issue you’re trying to rally the troops over is a false issue that has been exaggerated and stretched beyond all proportion, -with no proof or documentation to back it up.
Is that how you want Asian Americans to gain power? Through a lie?
John, shame on you and 80-20 for your racist assumptions. I sure hope 80-20 immediately distance themselves from racist supporters like you. Unless, of course, they are incline to defend the believe you hold that “most people who are against 80-20 on this forum are blacks pretending to be Asians.”
Sorry, but we ain’t your kind of “fellow smart Asians”. I’d like to see Dr. Edward Lin come in here and defend you. We’ll see.
Randy, if you are really a Chinese American, you must be an iron-head Republican. I am a bi-partisan, so not against to any party. But I know that the Republican’s strategy is to let Obama to win the Democratic Primary because he is easier to be defeated by Republicans than Clinton.
During the recent Democratic Debate, John Edwards accused Obama of being irresponsible because Obama casted abstaining for hundreds times as an Illinois senator. Clinton also mentioned a little about the Obama’s corruption suspicious during the debate. If Obama wins the Primary, he would be vulnerable under the powerful Republican attacking machine during the Final. The Republicans have not started their machine yet (Randy may be a small screw on that machine). On the other hand, Hillary Clinton would be much stronger since she has already experienced the attacks before.
Therefore, Obama vs. Clinton for the Democratic Primary is actually equivalent to Republican vs. Democratic for the Presidential Final. In other words, if Clinton loses in the Primary, Democrats lose in the Final! From this view, I do understand that some Asian Republicans wish Obama to win. But the recent development shows the Obama has a very small chance to win. We will see that on Feb 5. Anyone wants to bet?
Republican Asians: in general, to support 80-20 will bring you more tangible benefits than a gambling on Obama’s win. (Of course, if you own a lot of stocks of defense companies or really hate the Democratic big welfare programs, you are in that 20% this time).
Obama supporters in Chicago: would you please present a piece of evidence showing Obama has DONE something for the Asian community? We don’t like the sweet, non-measurable promises for the future that all politicians can say.
Democratic Asians: Do you expect a person who casts ‘abstaining’ for every bill to carry out so-called “changes”? Are you out of your mind?
Ordinary Americans: Let’s fight for fairness and justice, which is the core value of this country. Let’s stop America from sliding down to a second-class country or a third world country led by an incompetant Adminstration.
John’s line of reasoning is just as crass as 80-20’s. It’s no wonder they’re in the same camp.
Iron-head Republicans and blacks don’t read this (if I am one of you, I support Obama too. So we agree and nothing to argue.)
Why do I use “My fellow smart Asians”? Because some Asians think they are smarter than anyone else, in particular, smarter than Dr. Woo. Woo was just a Lieutenant Governor, right? Smarter, are you a governor?
Explaination of “My Smart Fellow Asians”: many Asians think they are smarter than anybody else, in particular, smarter than a retired Lieutatent Governor, Dr. Woo. So If I call them “My stupid fellow”, they certainly will not be happy.
There’s a huge difference between being smart and being crass. How you arrive at your assumption that “many Asians think they are smarter than anybody else,” isn’t helping your defense of Dr. Woo or 80-20.
This Asian American is voting for Obama. He has fought more vigorously for civil rights than any other democratic candidate ever. Just because, Obama, a constitutional law professor does not agree with the language with which the 80/20 document is worded, does not mean that he is opposed to Asian American equality on principle.
John, if being a Lt. Governor equates to being smart, as you propose, then how do you explain President Bush? Super smart, I suppose, according to John Lynn.
Jenn and Randy,
In your attempts at “reductio ad absurdum”, you two have committed a gigantic fallacy in reasoning. You took my statement in the “particular” (SOME who oppose 80-20 are ….) and drew a conclusion in the “universal” (ALL who oppose 80-20 are …..).
Where did you, as ” highly educated persons”, learn to make such deductions?
This kind of sophistry makes for endless, unproductive, wasteful argumentation.
I would suggest that you two take a course in LOGIC before embarking on argumentative postings. Before then, please do not try to draw conclusions from other people’s statements.
And, Mai, what was so racist in my statement? Did you sensed that you were being included in one of the following groups: opportunists, cowards, morons, or traitors?
Let me begin by stating that both Barack and Hillary are head and shoulders above any of the Republican candidates presently in the race. Having said that, if you truly care about the future of our country, if you want your children and grandchildren to have a better tomorrow, you should cast your vote for Barack Obama come Super Tuesday. I believe in my heart that he possesses the necessary combination of ethics, integrity, intellect, and progressive ideas it takes to be a great American president. He is the most genuine candidate of all, and I’m convinced that he won’t sway from doing what is right, when faced with difficult choices.
1.I explained my using “My Smart Fellow Asians” because some blacks here try to accuse me as a racist.
No they know what I really mean by that.
2.I find the biggest problem in Asian community is that a lot of Asians think they are smart enough to challenge any Asian leaders. This is why we have the 50-50 voting records and the 80-20, which claims to be the BIGGESTAsian political action orgnization, has only 700,000 members. 15 million Asians are just the dry sands. As a result, we are far behind AA in holding critical managerial positions in government, universities and industries and politicians don’t care us.
3.From the data of SC, obama gets 90% votes from blacks. This is why I keep saying blacks are smarter than Asians.
4.Those “smarters” who truly believe in Obama and attack 80-20 like carzy: 90% “stupid” Asians in NYC will support Clinton (they do not split 50-50 this time because it is not between two major Parties), and Obama will lose on Feb 5 anyaway no matter how start you are. Don’t kill yourself by that time.
80/20 is on a HUGE EGO trip. (Btw, 80/20, I’ve never heard of you before … I guess this is great publicity for you.)
So, let me get this straight … 80/20 is against Barack because he (or his staffers) didn’t answer their questionnaire? C’mon! Stop huffing and puffing just because a delegate didn’t want to answer that poorly written garbage. You honestly believe that just because some politician replies to your questionnaire, that it will actually equate to an actual commitment? Are you that naive? Grow up! How many false promises have both republicans and democrats made during their campaigns, just to get your vote?
Oh, and do you actually think that Edwards and Hillary actually took time off from their insane campaigning schedule, to answer your questionnaire personally? You don’t think they receive hundreds of requests weekly for similar things like that? They have staffers for that sort of thing. Edwards and Hillary probably aren’t even aware of 80/20. Ok, so is it lack of respect then? Did Barack dishonor you and marginalize your organization? Honestly, like one of the other posters mentioned, get a professional political writer to write these things up and perhaps it might be taken more seriously.
For the record, I’m Chinese American and I am currently on the fence between Barack and Hillary … leaning slightly more towards Hillary due to some of the answers given in the recent debates.
Stop being lazy and research the candidate’s track record and don’t just mindlessly follow what the Asian media or any other media tells you to do. And 80/20, start running a hate campaign against the Republicans, because none of their candidates answered your questionnaire either. Non-partisan? Riiiiight! Get over yourself 20/80, 80/20, and stop embarrassing the rest of us!
I hope 80/20’s misguided efforts do not compromise our chance of getting a Democratic president in Nov. Barack may very well beat Hillary … is 80/20 going to support McCain at that point?
To my surprise, my parents told me that Obama doesn’t support Asians. I wondered where and how they would get this idea. As an Obama follower for the last couple years, I can’t help but get angry at an articles like this because its unbelievably biased and plagues the integrity of a man who has worked all his life giving back to the community. I wish that people would get their facts right before they go ahead and publish some thing that millions of Asian and Americans will read.
I am a new member of the 80-20 and personally know nobody in the organization. This is my understanding about the 80-20’s campaign of defeating Obama to save Hillary.
80-20 is non-partisan because its members come from different parties and independent. I respect Dr. Woo because he was able to let people from two major parties sitting together, that sounds a mission impossible. To my understanding, its goal is NOT to choose a party, even NOT to choose a candidate. Instead, for this time, it is to get the candidates to commit to do six concrete, specific steps that will promote Asian’s social, political and economic status. These steps are specified in a questionnaire. If all candidates signs to answer the questionnaire, perfect, the 80-20 gets what it wants, it keeps neutral, and its members can vote for their own favorable candidate. Otherwise, if whoever refuses to answer directly contests with the one who has answered, we try to defeat the former.
1. Why questionnaire: Some politicians like to fool us using sweet, non-measurable promises. We got tons before, but they are not useful.
2. Questionnaire poorly written?: It was composed by political and legal experts from the 80-20. The requests are reasonable, moderate, short, and perfectly clear. Hillary, John Edwards, Richerson and Biden all have no problem to understand them. The Questionnaire came out after a long nigotiation among the members in the 80-20 to identify urgent requests from Asian communities.
3. Questionnaire does not cover my requests: none politician will not buy a long list at one time. But you will be directly or indirectly benefit from the fulfillment of the urgent requests this time. Your specific requests, such as immigration, may be covered during the next election.
4. The candidates can eat their words later: they have to consider the huge political price they have to pay: we support their opponents during re-election.
5. Obama is a better president: It is hard to say who is better, so but if each Asian does his own research to find out who is better, it is likely that we split our votes 50-50.
6. Obama will be better to Asians: he does not say to offer anything specific to Asians. Instead he refuses to answer the questionnaire although the cost of signing is virtually none for him.
7. Obama can do a better job for the country: if you put the priority of other ethnic group’s benefits over your own, you are in that 20%.
8. Is it a right thing to do? Fairness and justice are among the core values of America. Asians are left behind in pursuing their political, social and economic status because we are not equally treated. All other ethnic groups do in this way.
9. I question the credibility of the 80-20: the 80-20 has 700,000 members now. It is led by a group of well-educated, experienced board members, in particular, Dr. Woo, who was a Lieutenant Governor of the State of Delaware before. They all have declared not to seek governmental appointments for themselves but volunteer their time for benefits of Asian people as a whole.
By the way, several guys here claim they are Chinese. I know they are not. It is a conspiracy to pretend to be Chinese.
I just found this web-site after reading my friend’s Dec 07 issue of KoreAm. I’m not surprised by this one-sided article. This is coming from a publication that published an essay called ” Why I hate Blacks”. I don’t think we should be so absorbed in our cultures hardships ( white, black, asian or anything else). Everyone has issues.We need to focus on making our country better as a whole.
The Chair of the API Legislative Caucus in California has endorsed Barack Obama, with a column on the Asian American Fund website:
http://www.aaa-fund.com/blog/
80-20’s brush strokes are now having major consequences.
African Americans friends visiting this website: We are not against Obama because he is an African American but because he does not stand on the fundamental value of America, i.e, equal opportunity. We all know he is related to Asia more than Hillary. So his ethnic background is not a factor here.
I know you are pretending Asian because no one, after reading the 80-20’s website, will not understand the simple reasons and tactics but hate so much the people fighting for their own benefits unless they are retarded. In that case, they are really pathetic.
I think what disturbs me the most about all of these 80-20 people is the fact that they resort to outright *LIES* to try to convince people of their viewpoint. I have no problem with divergent viewpoints as long as they have a solid foundation, but when you have people like this “John Lynn” who make ridiculous statements such as:
“We are not against Obama because he is an African American but because he does not stand on the fundamental value of America, i.e, equal opportunity.”
Nothing in Obama’s voting record would in any way support such a statement. If you could point to an issue Obama voted on, or even a policy statement, then I would have no problem with that statement. A couple of posts ago I threw an open challenge to these 80-20 people to point to *one* statement or voting issue that would support their ludicrous claims. I got nothing but whining over their self-aggrandized “questionaire”.
Seriously, if the behavior of the 80-20 supporters here is in any way indicative of the behavior of the 80-20 leadership, then I am not surprised Obama did not answer the questionaire.
If 80-20 continues to behave in such an unprofessional manner they will wind up being an irrelevant fringe group. I don’t think our community is well-served by an organization that outright LIES to their membership.
A bit interesting that your last name is Lynn and the writer of this Asian Week article’s name is Guillermo … not that an Asian cannot not have a non-Asian last name … just a bit uncommon if you are not.
“I am a new member of the 80-20 and personally know nobody in the organization.”
Hmm, good to know that you are unbiased.
“… 80-20 is non-partisan because its members come from different parties and independent. … To my understanding, its goal is NOT to choose a party, even NOT to choose a candidate. Instead, for this time, it is to get the candidates to commit to do six concrete, specific steps that will promote Asian’s social, political and economic status. “
If this is indeed true, why is 80/20 singling out Obama? Did McCain, Huckabee, or any other Republican fill out the questionnaire to their satisfaction? From my understanding, the answer is no. So indeed, 80/20 or the leadership in 80/20 that are behind the “Obama is the devil” campaign, favor the Democratic campaign (which is a good thing) and were insulted or perhaps surprised that a Democrat did not fill out their questionnaire. John Lynn and other 80/20 supporters … please EXPLAIN THIS ONE point before moving on to your other rhetoric.
“…Why questionnaire: Some politicians like to fool us using sweet, non-measurable promises. We got tons before, but they are not useful.”
Again, please do not be naive. Empty political promises is nothing new in our country. Keep in mind, they want your vote. Filling out a questionnaire /= actual commitment. If you really want to know if your candidate’s values are aligned with yours, do some research, watch the debates, and do not watch FOX News … sorry I had to throw that last one in.
“Questionnaire poorly written?: It was composed by political and legal experts from the 80-20. The requests are reasonable, moderate, short, and perfectly clear. Hillary, John Edwards, Richerson and Biden all have no problem to understand them. The Questionnaire came out after a long nigotiation among the members in the 80-20 to identify urgent requests from Asian communities.”
The much ballyhooed 80/20 questionnaire:
http://www.80-20initiative.net/news/preselect2008_questionnaire.asp
What makes 80/20 think they represent me as a Chinese American? It seems more like political power posturing for their own benefit. Read it … make up your own mind concerning how it is written.
“ The candidates can eat their words later: they have to consider the huge political price they have to pay: we support their opponents during re-election.”
By then my friend, it would be too late. *Cough* Bush.
“Obama is a better president: It is hard to say who is better, so but if each Asian does his own research to find out who is better, it is likely that we split our votes 50-50.”
Oh reaaallly? And what is that lovely statistic based on? What recent independent poll is that statistic pulled from that 80-20 personally did not conduct?
“ … he does not say to offer anything specific to Asians. Instead he refuses to answer the questionnaire although the cost of signing is virtually none for him.”
Questionnaire. Questionnaire. Stop crying. Again, I really doubt Hillary or Edwards remembers you or 80/20 … remember, they have staffers for that sort of thing. Try sending an emissary group made up of not only east coast Asians (80/20 is based in NY), but also west coast Asians from various Asian ethnic groups (not just Chinese) and organizations (not just the ones affiliated with 80/20). Have a face-to-face townhall meeting with the candidates when they come to campaign in CA since the west coast has the most Asians according to a US Census and can probably swing the election. Have it broadcasted live on public radio so “we the people” can make our own conclusions. Allow for call-ins from the public. Have it in the SF Bay Area so I can attend. ;) A face-to-face meeting is more meaningful than a questionnaire with a bunch of demands. http://www.aasc.ucla.edu/archives/census2000chinese.htm
“…Fairness and justice are among the core values of America. Asians are left behind in pursuing their political, social and economic status because we are not equally treated. All other ethnic groups do in this way.”
I actually agreed with that point. Which makes the responsibility of every Asian American that much greater in actually doing some research, figuring out what issues matter most to you, and stop listening “blindly” to organizations with political agendas or egos. Unfortunately, a lot of the more uneducated (which usually means older generation Asians) are going to fall for whatever the 80-20 tells them to do. 80-20 knows this and will take advantage of it. Clever, but shameless.
“ I question the credibility of the 80-20: the 80-20 has 700,000 members now. It is led by a group of well-educated, experienced board members …”
Quantity and numbers in membership do not impress me. Does that 700,000 include the thousands 80/20 spam via email?
“By the way, several guys here claim they are Chinese. I know they are not. It is a conspiracy to pretend to be Chinese.
–John Lynn on Jan 27, 2008”
Hmm, ARE YOU CHINESE, Mr. Lynn? Not exactly a common Chinese or Asian last name? I am definitely Chinese (you’ll just have to take my word for it) armed with a spell checker! Go figure. Let’s stick to the issues please.
Like I stated in one of my earlier posts, I DO NOT SUPPORT Obama 100%. I am in fact on the fence still, and so a live town hall meeting with the candidates (that is geared toward Asian interests and issues) would help me a lot. Well, I doubt 80/20 will have time to organize that … I’m sure they will be busy with something else more important.
Oh, and Mr. Lynn or whoever you really are, this might be huge shocker, but there are actually Democratic Asians that do not support 80/20’s view of Obama. Stop claiming that we are black or republicans … it kind of shows how ignorant you are.
John Lynn (my cousin from rehab) … you really think Blacks read AsianWeek?
LOLOLOLLOLOLOL you fail at life
Republicans RULE!
I find it amusing that John Lynn claims that the 80-20 questionaire was “written by legal and political experts”.
I guess these legal and political experts didn’t know that mandating quotas is illegal. Isn’t that why 80-20 had to modify their original questionaire to being with?
Vote for me! I’m Mitt Romney!
http://www.mittromney.com
“I find the biggest problem in Asian community is that a lot of Asians think they are smart enough to challenge any Asian leaders… 15 million Asians are just the dry sands. … This is why I keep saying blacks are smarter than Asians…Those “smarters” who truly believe in Obama and attack 80-20 like carzy: 90% “stupid” Asians in NYC will support Clinton …, and Obama will lose on Feb 5 anyaway no matter how start you are. Don’t kill yourself by that time.
–John Lynn on Jan 27, 2008”
Wow, being an immigrant of Asian decent (lived in the U.S. for 20+ years), I really have a problem with that statement. Is this the official view of the organization 80-20? Are you authorized to make statements like that on their behalf? Please keep your elitist (assuming you are one of those leaders that other “smarters,” “carzy,” retarded, pathetic, and “dry sand” Asians shouldn’t oppose) and self-race hating opinions to yourself!
80-20=60
Watch Rambo this week!
http://movies.break.com/rambo/
It will rock your socks off!
Adrian!!!
Real Asian Friends, please read:
I don’t represent the 80-20 but I acknowledge that I paid a few bucks to them. I tell you why. I do some investment. After I lost for several times in buying stocks, I buy mutual funds now because I don’t have much time to research stocks (investment experts tell me not buy stocks that I don’t know) and I believe the fund managers are smarter than I am. Dr. Woo of 80-20 is my “fund manager” for political elections.
I believe all readers here are educated. If you are, you should have had some kind of training of so-called scientific methods: using numbers and logic. Numbers show that Asian is the last and the only ethnic group is discriminated when we apply to school admission, jobs, promotions, and nominations for judges and managerial positions. We have much higher education level (57% have college education?), work so hard (50-60hours/week), but 1/7 don’t have health insurance? Why? Because some educated ones even can not afford health insurance if they can not get a good pay job, can not get promoted, they stay in poverty. Few represent our interests in the upper levels in governments, companies and universities. We lose in legal battles. The issue is that we are not given equal opportunities. The 80-20 is for both elite and grass-root: If you get a job in any government agency, you get an insurance plan automatically, or you ask your Asian friend working in government agency to find a welfare program for you to apply if you have such a friend. I really don’t know why this is so difficult to be understood.
Will Obama really help us (both elite and poverty)? I really doubt it. As a civil right leader, he has not done and has not promised, even in empty words, any thing specific for Asians. If he wins, some of us may be able to get a piece of bone after other ethnic group eats all the meat. But you have to know the total resource is the constant: if others get more, you get less. I believe that Hillary can offer anything that Obama can offer to Asians for the following reasons. She pushed universal insurance before, her husband offered a lot to the other ethnic group and she knows that, most importantly, she signed the questionnaire. Many of you keep challenging the questionnaire, it may not be a perfect way (but can you find a perfect way?), but at least it is a test. The test shows that Hillary agrees more than Obama the claim that Asians are not equally given opportunities. Obama may say that your Asians are fine, everybody has a college degree and some of you have technical jobs or have restaurants and so I don’t have to do anything specific for you guys.
Asian democrats also have to consider who is more electable in the final.
Some of you keep challenging 80-20 because you are very proud of your intelligence. Please consider to go get elected to Washington, D.C or your local government. Our Asian communities need you to represent us, elite OR grass-root, and I can get people to help you too. But you really don’t have to attack 80-20 only because you want to prove you are smarter than Dr. Woo and 80-20.
Dude, John, what is your preoccupation with this “smarter” thing? And, Dr. Woo as your “fund manager” for politics? Good luck on your “speculative” investments, especially with such irrationality making all the “smarter” bets for you. It’s starting to look like the “80-20 fund” is loosing quite a bit of investor confidence lately, with the APIA market reacting quite negatively to aggresive and fraudulent tactics against a presidential candidate.
To John Lynn: I think the fatal flaw in your thinking is that you think answering a questionaire is indicative of a candidate’s support for Asian American issues.
Answering a questionaire doesn’t really prove anything. All it proves is that the candidate knows what to say to placate the masses and win votes.
In order to properly ascertain a candidate’s committment to Asian American issues, you should look at that person’s voting record in Congress/Senate. Look at the policies they support. Look at what they have said in the past.
That is the proper way to evaluate someone. You don’t shove a questionaire in their face demanding answers and then conclude that they are “actively against Asian American empowerment” if they don’t choose to answer. Yet that is what 80-20 is doing.
You also repeatedly make bizarre claims about “losing in legal battles”. Can you point to any specific court cases that we as a community have lost? Your posts are long on rhetoric and short on specifics.
Many people here claim they are Chinese. I thought Obama had only one Chinese brother-in-law, right?
Guys attacking 80-20: Pick topics to write 500-word essay.
1. Do you believe that Aisans are not given equal opportunities? Give evidence to show yes or no.
2. What are the urgent issues in Asian communities?
How has Mr. Obama promised to solve some of these problems?
I hate to say it but it feels like we as the Asian (Chinese) community is acting out of fear.
We are afraid of Black people, and embrace White people. We are making a big mistake on the Obama/Clinton debate. Let’s get beyond our prejudice and stereo types that we all have and listen to what he says and what he has done in his senate position.
Blindfold yourself and listen to his message. His message is exactly what we need. Clinton is only about obtaining power for herself and Bill. Obama is about unifying the country and giving equal opportunity to all Americans including us Asians.
This is our opportunity to get a president that will be our friend because he is genuine, and not just courting us for votes.
80-20 is a quota system and will not work. We will be disapointed and should dismiss those that have written it.
He is selfless… the one we need NOW !
Most Asian people live in CA and NY. At this moment, polls show that Hillary vs. Obama = 47:35 in CA, and 56:28 in NY. This is the “overwhelming victory” that 80-20’s ads wish.
http://politics.nytimes.com/packages/html/election-guide/2008/primaries/states/CA.html
It is the time for Sen. Obama’s Asian supporters to consider to change a camp (Betray is very easy for you anyway). Otherwise, they have no chance to get government appointments. BTW, 80-20 board members have declared they will not take any government jobs. In fact, Hillary may not like them either. They scarify themselves for the benefits of other Asians, including those attacking them. They are real civil rights leaders.
Ok, this John Lynn character is starting to smell like a troll. “Scarify”? Nice going John Lynn. You really had me going there for a while, with your feigned bad grammar and typos.
Randy: I focus on issues and you focus on correcting my typos, Ok? Thanks.
@John Lynn,
Never heard of 80/20 before. Thanks to your racist loud mouth, now I am embarrassed that such an APA organization existed. I dearly hope that you are not a spokes person for 80/20. If you truly care about 80/20, you should really keep your opinion to yourself before turning more people against it.
This has to be an exercise fit for the Gong Show of yore.
“John Lynn’s” er, ah literary “style” is far too stitted, self-conscious? AND mannered, from syntax to argument, that the word absurd fails to encompass all.
It’s hilarious.
Besides, the Kennedys today make this backwaters squabble considerably less than pertinent.
The Clintons are running scared, even with John Lynns on their payroll. Bill has bulled himself over the shards of this china closet. Who’s running? Him or her? Twofers?
And the sad fact herein is that 80-20 has backed the wrong horse no matter how you look at it.
Favoring Clinton is one thing, but “defeat Obama” is quite another. I think AAAFund? or is it AAPI? may well become the urban league to 80-20’s” belated emulatiion of a national organization for “yellow” people.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Please note that all the pro-80-20 arguments are premised on perceived perks and positions for “Asians” rather than any true respect and/or consideration of same. I’m not agin the organization OR its stated goals, but I would hope they will now begin to rethink both their policies AND their public pronouncements. Even today’s considerably less than “supreme” court still publishes the dissents of their minorities.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Guys, don’t waste your time or breath on John Lynn, whoever he is. He’s about as relevant and “meaningful” as Jim Erbes?
No one has submitted an essay? Then I assume you Obama’s supporters don’t know what Asian Communities really need. Let me give a hint. Consider common issues like this: gun, drug, unemployment, health, education, equal opportunity, immigration…
Well, forget, your guys can do nothing expect personal attack.
Hillary will win anyway, but she may lose in the general election because Sen. Obama plays the role of Nadar in year 2000. You republican’s helpers are happy.
Can’t wait to read Emil’s next diatribe, and AsianWeek’s endorsement of controversial columns…to sell a few ads? Between folks like John Lynn, Emil, AsianWeek and 80-20, I’m afrad the larger Asian American community isn’t very well served. And, that’s a real shame. I mean, sham.
Perhaps this post will take us back to the original question at hand… ?
I just returned to the Bay Area from canvassing for the Obama campaign at the South Carolina primaries and had a chance to read more of Obama’s book, the Audacity of Hope, on the plane.
Friends, in pages 115-120, Obama explains with clarity his policies on when he will and will not complete special interest questionnaires. At one point… he described 80-20’s recent actions to a tee. It made me to do a double take, and then, I had to chuckle. Unfortunately, 80-20 is just one of many special interest groups who feel that it’s okay to resort to less-than-credible, bullying tactics to make their point.
Pages 115-120 reflect only a small part of the strength of his character, and how he weighs in on each situation he faces based on the core foundation his values. So if you haven’t read the book yet and decide to check it out, I suggest reading it in its entirety to fully appreciate the broader perspective of what he speaks about in those particular pages.
In any case, based on my interpretation and to answer Emil’s original question, Obama didn’t snub Asian Americans by not completing the questionnaire.
He decisively snubbed 80-20.
And now that we have the answer as to why he didn’t complete the questionnaire, 80-20 can proceed with their full-on attack against him (and we can all go home now, yay!).
But here’s the problem for the folks at 80-20:
If they proceed with their self-imposed “Battle Against Barack” for not agreeing to their terms and conditions, they will continue to be perceived as the 小人 that I spoke of earlier. On the other hand, if they don’t, they will lose credibility for not honoring their own words. Either way, they lose, and so does the mission for which it stands.
So what are the lessons to be learned from all of this?
First, it’s never a good idea to threaten people - even your opponents - as the means to garner a response. That kind of approach in and of itself is part of the problem.
Second, people (Obama) have the right to not agree with you (80-20), but that doesn’t give you the right to treat them poorly. If we aren’t able to treat others with the most basic of human decency, then what kind of people are we?
Third, knee-jerk reactions almost always result in the shooting of your own feet (knees, feet… isn’t the English language a funny thing sometimes… that almost sounds like an ancient Chinese saying… ). Take time out to think about the consequences of your actions before you actually take them.
Fourth, there is ALWAYS a way to resolve a problem in a civil and reasonable way. If 80-20 had phrased their questionnaire (and response) just a little bit differently, all of this could have turned out very differently and in a much more positive light.
I assume most of you on this board know what I’m saying. I’m hopeful that 80-20 will get it, too, and I hope they will find it within themselves to issue a different kind of public statement in response to all this backlash, one that we can all appreciate.
Last but not least, while I have everyone’s attention (woo hoo!), if you are an Obama supporter, please get out and help with the campaign here in California. It’s useful to show support for him on the Internet, but more important is getting out and canvassing for him. Back in South Carolina as I waited in line for my assignment, volunteers in front of me and behind me were from all over the U.S. - Seattle, Oakland, Massachusetts, Washington, Indiana — these two college students drove all night, got no sleep, and reported to the campaign headquarters right on time like zombies, ready to do what they could to help! If you are a California resident, please sign up asap to volunteer for at least 1/2 a day before the Feb. 5th primaries. Every little bit helps, and, if there was ever a time to be a part of the political process, that time is now.
To sign up, go here:
http://action.barackobama.com/page/s/volunteer
Christine, brilliant! Can I suggest you send your opinions officially and directly to the leaders of 80-20? Here is their information, just so that they don’t go claiming they don’t read blogs and that these concerns never exist in the first place:
http://www.80-20initiative.net/about/officers.asp
Christine:
Thank you for telling us the complete different reason why is Sen. Obama snubbing us. So the reason is not “quota” nor miscommunication. What word should be used to describe such a politician who intentionally provides inconsistent answers?
Labor Department’s data and research at Harvard University show that Asian is the only and last ethnic discriminated group. An average Asian has only 1/3 of chance as AA to raise a manager position. The urgent problems in Asian communities are discrimination and poverty. And the poverty is the direct result of discrimination in the workplace against Asians. But many people here like you claiming to represent Asian community’s interests also choose to ignore the facts. Can you provide me logical explanation?
Christine, 80-20 leaders have declared not to seek any appointments from governments although they are 100 times more eligible than you. Can you declare you will not seek an appointment?
Average Asians: if you have not be promised by a Sen. Obama a position in his cabinet, (Today’s polls show it is 15% probability he will win the election), look at this projection: If Hillary wins, hopefully, 500,000 MORE Asians every year promoted to managers and two million people directly benifit from it. If Obama wins, this hope does not exist at all.
Sen. Obama is indeed a good speaker. But fact that he does not want to do anything with the questionnaire reminds me the saying “Talkers do not practice and act” in a Hong Kong Kong Fu movie. We suggest that Sen. Obama run for Illinois Governor position first to get some administrative experience.
Aside:
To Mai and Randy
and Christine . . . and others . . .
Congratulations on your impassioned participation in the political trenches.
And good luck.
Two little thoughts as well:
First, are the “John Lynns,” using Latino surnames out there as well, muddying minority matters, tossing in divisive garbage, and otherwise insulting said minorities?
Second, whereas Emil AND AsianWeek may err at times, can you name ONE major daily whose editorial policies are less than right-wing?
And unless someone with the bucks and the pluck stands up and invests in another English-language publication for “Asian Pacific Americans,” let’s at least NOT join the likes of posters like “Eddie,” who referred to “the yellow filth at AsianWeek,” or Jim Erbes, who yakked gleefully about the pogroms of “Chinese merchant-class pigs” in Indonesia in the past, more or less inciting same today.
They would shut down even this venue, blog?, where we are all free to vent or rant.
And for those too young to know, AsianWeek is nearly three decades old and has served the Asian community long before those three idiot “guest” pieces by someone named Kenneth Eng.
So, root and fight for Obama, but let’s not advocate tossing out the infant, instead, help drain the bath water you detest.
Frank Eng
P.S.: AsianWeek has also, at the very least, two excellent columnists in their two Phils, Phil Nash in the Beltway and Phil Chung in Hollywood. And, on a strictly personal note, I can’t begin to decipher Art Hu’s belated “film reviews,” much less some other stuff. But, hey!, everyone has the right to speak for themselves. No?
Excluding the Lynns and the Erbes? Well, we can ignore them, right?
Why you people spent so long on the discussion of the question for which the answer is obvious? Why is Obama snubbing us? The answer is that our interests are conflict with the ethnic group Obama represents. Mexican Americans know such an answer immediately without any discussion (go look at the polls). Be sure you go vote for Clinton on Feb.5.
Dear Emil,
Thank you very much for spreading the 80-20 message.
I am a paying member of 80-20 for several years by now. For those who are not, I encourage you to visit their “low tech” webpage and pay our little due to support their work on our behalves. I consider the due as an insurance premium. And I believe that you cannot find a better deal anywhere to ensure our welfare as a member of the least influential minority in this country. (If you can, please share with me the bargain.)
I am an independent. Some previous comments alleged that 80-20 is a biased partisan organization or part of the establishment. I can tell you from my several years’ experience that it is not true. Otherwise, I would not have stayed with it (I have voted for Dem., Rep., Green, Libertarian in various elections).
Although I am an independent, I have registered as a Democrat in this election to have my say in the primary. My selection was on cue from the K-street lobbyists who have shifted their money toward Democrats, meaning that the chance is higher this year for a Democrat to win the White House.
I did not know 80-20 would get involved in primaries and my favorite candidates are Ron Paul and Kucinich. Since I register as a Democrat, that means my first choice was Kucinich. Our primary will be held on Feb. 5 and Kucinich has not chance this time. So I was ready to vote for Obama among the top two dogs in the race. I don’t know much about Obama. My selction of him is driven by the disgust of Clintons. I am one of the Anybody-but-Clinton.
Since I would follow 80-20 in the National, primary is the time to express myself.
Then I was informed of 80-20’s call to defeat Obama for his “sin” to snub us. I was so sorry that this happened, and the other than Obama is a Clinton. I would much prefer to vote for John Edwards in our primary if he had had a better prospect. Since Obama is so much ahead of Edwards, to beat him to support 80-20 to enhance our political muscle, I will vote for Hillary on Feb. 5. I am sorry that I have to give Obama volunteers knocking on my door such an answer. He seems really inspiring a lot of people.
I just read the book “Israel Lobby”. I guess that you know the influence of Jews in this country. So where is the counter-influence from Arabic Americans. The authors’ quote from President Truman says it all: I am not aware that Arabic Americans have ever swung an election. So build our power to swing an election before our rights in this country get respected by the powerfuls. The close race between Obama and Clinton is a rare opportunity for our block vote to show its utility. Put down our differences and any high-minded ideals. Follow 80-20’s call to defeat Obama. At a mere 5%, we cannot afford to pursue our individual choice.
To Ramey Ko,
Helle there,
I sympathize with you. Since you were a Chicago Law student, you should know how politics works in this country. If you can make Obama signs the 80-20 statements, I am more than happy to switch back to Obama.
Your criticism of S.B. Wu is undue. I am not aware what you have done for us. But Prof. Wu’s public interest work dates well back. It was one of his non-for-profit publications introduced me to science education in U.S. and brought me to Graduate School in this country more than 20 years ago. Thus, he has earned his trust with his contributions to society, not just by words. Frankly, if the initial invitation to join 80-20 was from you instead of him, it would have ended up in the trash can for junk mails.
Best regards and looking forward to your success in getting Obama’s signature.
What a peculiar sort of racism, -where you think a black candidate (Obama) would only represent black interests while thinking a white candidate (Clinton) would somehow look after Asian American interests and not white interests.
If Obama wins the democratic nomination (and chances are increasing every day that he will), what will 80-20 tell their membership then? Will they tell Asian Americans to support Obama, who “snubbed” them, or a Republican candidate, -none of whom bothered to even respond to the questionaire?
Randy, exactly and signing a questionaire no why would Obama do that? I don’t sign my name to anything and if you think Hillary has Asian-Americans best interest in mind you better think again. If she was concerned with Asian -Americans why didnt she go to bat for the Asian-American donor who went to prison for fradulent activties as it related to the Clintons.
John Lynn,
Bravo to you. You can ignore morons such as Randy. Only morons would shout that they are highly educated.
Powerful you have become, young John Lynn… the Dark Side I sense in you…
But beware the Dark Side… anger, fear, aggression… the Dark Side of the Force are they. Easily they flow… quick to join you in a fight…
If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny…
Consume you… it will…
I recently wrote this:
“80/20 is clearly not dedicated to me. Its supporters have attacked detractors of 80/20 as ill-informed propaganda artists who do not support equal employment for Asian Americans. 80/20 has spread malicious lies to Asian Americans in California — particularly those who rely on Asian language news outlets for their voting information; one Obama supporter was infuriated to find that an ad in a Chinese-language newspaper actually led one voter to believe that Obama was vocally against equal rights and civil liberties for Asian/Asian Americans.
Since the inception of this little fiasco, 80/20 has not demonstrated a dedication to us and our community. Rather, it has tried to manipulate us through deception, disinformation, and political bullying into voting for Senator Hillary Clinton, even before Obama responded one way or another on the questionnaire.
And from its tactics, its inflammatory rhetoric, and its lack of reasonable access to a spell-checker, it’s also clear that 80/20 does not have “the political know-how”. And frankly, I’m insulted by any organization that encourages us to sit by while they do the political work for us. We are intelligent people in our own right, we don’t need anyone to claim “political know-how” for our community; we can damn well do the politicking ourselves. If 80/20 truly was dedicated to our community, they would be encouraging political involvement, not telling us to sit on the sidelines because they know more than we do.
80/20 asks if we are strong. Yes, we are — stronger than letting 80/20 manipulate us into political ignorance.”
Read the full post here:
http://www.reappropriate.com/?p=1022
Chinanam is right. According to Christine, Sen. Obama is snubbing us because he thinks that we are a “special interest group”. He is right, our interests are very special. We don’t have serious problems in gun, employment and drugs. In fact, some of us even have 60 hours work per week to do. Instead our major concerns are equal opportunity, poverty and immigration. For example, I heard the immigration process for some Filipino’s family members may take 24 years. Just on these urgent and critical issues, Sen. Obama is not with us. He ignores our requests for equal opportunities and opposes immigration.
Some people always try to stop others from speaking out the truth by accusing of “racism”. I am not afraid of that, because I don’t insult or attack people in other ethnic groups. In fact, all mainstream media talk about race these days and a big part of politics in Washington is just about how to split resources among ethnic groups (Do you know the function of the ethnic group column in all forms you fill out?).
Sen. Obama has only a small number of Latino supporters because of his stand on immigration(Hillary vs Obama=3:1), lost a great deal of supporters from the white because of the overwhelming supporters from AA in the SC primary(major media’s view). He is snubbing Asian Americans because of special interest conflicts.
On the other hand, Hillary gives us hopes, or at least, she shows that she understands our concerns by signing to promise to execute those six steps. Some people make the decision of candidates based on ‘like’ or ‘dislike’ as if they choose girlfriends. Personally, I also think Hillary is cold and tough, but Obama is charming. However, what we need for president is a personal who can bring us maximum benefits. We also need a tough person to manage our government agencies, which have the lowest efficiency among developed countries(17th). Certainly Hillary is a better manager.
The Chicago law school students: please use evidence (number is best) and logic to make your arguments or you can never win a case.
John, you’re the greatest example of a pile of conflicting mess in this discussion. None of this stuff makes any sense, and so easily debunked:
You wrote:
“Sen. Obama has only a small number of Latino supporters because of his stand on immigration(Hillary vs Obama=3:1), lost a great deal of supporters from the white because of the overwhelming supporters from AA in the SC primary(major media’s view). He is snubbing Asian Americans because of special interest conflicts. ”
How can a person be so conflicted, even with his own arguments? I guess one has to be John Lynn to know.
I think John Lynn’s daily essays are informative and logical. But I don’t agree his guess that his opponents here are actually blacks pretending Chinese. John Lynn missed one possibility that his opponents here are real Asian Americans but marry black husbands and they are also fighting for the benefits of their children. It is understandable.
Well, sometimes politics is ugly, in particular, during an election, and democracy is not perfect. But nothing is perfect, right?
Wow. I am speechless. So in your mind the only people that could possibly support Obama would be someone who is either Black or married to one?
Perhaps you should get your head out of the sand and look around. There is a huge amount of support for Obama in the Asian American community. Even Asian American celebrities like Kal Penn, Kelly Hu, and Yul Kwon are supporters.
Of course, the implied racist assumption inherent in your post is that a Black candidate will only look out for Black interests. And yet you don’t think Hillary Clinton would put white interests before Asian interests.
So, now it’s down, and I mean down, to Billary and Barack, unless McCain can raise a quorum in favor of another hundred-year’s war, globally.
Let’s see:
Yesterday? they scattered the Mahatma’s ashes “in the sea,” presumably the Indian Ocean, what was left after the ashes scattered in the Ganges?, per Sir Richard Attenborough’s wondrous cinematic account.
Today, in checking Wikipedia on the Fabians, one learns that both contemp Brits, Blair AND Brown, are, or were “Fabian Socialists.”
Wow. And Blair is Bush’s handmaiden?
On the other hand, it also seems that the noblesse-oblige types of Britains past were less than respectful of their own laboring masses, so what would you expect from them for those laboring masses of colonial color?
Alex Cockburn, in Counterpunch online today. disses both Billary and Barack, the latter more or less dismissed for “Aeolian” fancies, which I take to be pie in the political skies.
He could well be correct, but, then, Billary is, like the Fabians?, quintessentially Establishment, and colonial at that.
Also, today, none less than Paul Craig Roberts comes down smack in the middle, between “deregulation” and “regulation.”
He, too, no doubt is right, as in Bingo.
But, bottom line here, for BOTH sides of this incredible “string” of political cant and descant, stands a work of cinematic faction, fact cum fiction, Warren Beatty’s “Reds.”
In which Emma Goldman proclaims the obvious, then as now, that the entire charade of “Presidential” politics is but a four-year “fix” of questionable reassurance.
Western headlines document some 10-mil migrant Chinese laborers stranded in historic snows and denied? their annual rite of homegoing?
Even as “idealistic” youngsters scramble domestically for what they believe may be the “answer.”
There is none.
Only the plodding, daily victories and defeats of each and every one of us.
Gandhi is said to have said that “all” dictators and miscreants ultimately “fail.”
Well, has anyone heard of Bush/Cheney impeachments beyond the 5% in Congress? that excludes Pelosi and that “black” Congressman from Michigan?
So, folks, belay all that yatata about “color” and resign yourselves to “eight more years” at the very least.
During which you should, if you are “smart,” invest in all that matters to you, and damn the rest.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Even Barack, aeolian dreams or not, can only hope to steer this feckless ship of unstateliness a few degrees to the left. And did you catch the “story” today that some 60% of the workforce, public and otherwise?, have personally witnessed fraud and corruption? This is a nation without rudder OR compass, a nation of Neanderthals who pretend to “civilization.” Yes, the “sophistication” is there, in spades, and in the glossy ad pages of cultural ic0natry, but it is as empty and devoid of “value” as those who mindlessly and immorally “play the game” of dollars and lack of sense.
Obama’s stands on issues such as immigration, war, equal opportunity, education, poverty, welfare are exactly a typical AA congressman’s stands. I like some, such as his ending war, trying to get health insurance for the poor ( Hillary also can do these). However, sad to say, he has not transformed himself from a typical AA congressman to a president candidate for a whole nation. Of course, I understand, it was a big risk to him to change stands: change on immigration pleases Mexicans but loses the White’s support, change on Equal Opportunity please Asians but lose Blacks. Also his opponents would accuse him of inconsistence.
Obama’s stands on issues such as immigration, war, equal opportunity, education, poverty, welfare are exactly a typical AA congressman’s stands. I like some, such as his ending war, trying to get health insurance for the poor( Hillary also can do these). However, sad to say, he has not transformed himself from a typical AA congressman to a president candidate for a whole nation. Of course, I understand, it was a big risk to him to change stands: change on immigration pleases Mexicans but loses the White’s support, change on Equal Opportunity please Asians but lose Blacks. Also his opponents would accuse him of inconsistence.
“Highly educated or law school students”: please find out exact definition of “racism”, and differentiate between “racism” and “racial benefits”. If whenever I talk about differences between races, you shouted “racism”, you’d better go play on the “the voice and Americans” instead if “Voice of Asian Americans”. Each race has unique problems and wishes.
Good news! Sen. Obama signed to with 6 YES on the questionnaire.
Forks, forget the arguments. Support Sen. Obama for US. President!
Good news! Today Sen. Obama signed with 6 YES on the questionnaire.
Forget the arguments above. Go Support Sen. Obama for US. President!
Just a point of clarification, Randy.
As far as I know, Yul Kwon has not officially put his support behind any candidate. Other than that, I’m behind everything else you said in your last comment.
John Lynn,
“We don’t have serious problems in gun, employment and drugs.”
There are few studies on race-specific concerns regarding drugs, however, some groups are dedicated to treating substance abuse amongst Asian Americans, particularly amongst certain Asian American ethnic groups that have higher rates of substance abuse. I would count substance abuse — alcohol, drugs, and tobacco — amongst key Asian American issues, particularly in its invisibility even within our community.
“Sen. Obama is not with us. He ignores our requests for equal opportunities and opposes immigration.”
Senator Obama did not ignore any request for equal opportunity. Please do not misrepresent the facts.
Also, Senator Obama has been a leader in Illinois and D.C. on comprehensive immigration reform. In Illinois, he led the passage of the state’s version of the DREAM act. He clearly does not oppose immigration; that’s not only hyperbolic, it’s unfactual.
“He is snubbing Asian Americans because of special interest conflicts. ”
No. His campaign has clearly maintained from the start that the problem with the questionnaire was over its inclusion of quotas. Senator Obama is not “the Black candidate”, despite what Bill Clinton might have you believe. He has never said that anyone should vote for him because of his race, and actually steers clear from painting himself as the “race candidate”; instead he’s about unifying all Americans by finding common ground. In fact, there was quite a bit of hullabaloo last year because African Americans supported Clinton over Obama for a long time, before they got to know Obama and his platform better.
“what we need for president is a personal who can bring us maximum benefits. We also need a tough person to manage our government agencies, which have the lowest efficiency among developed countries(17th). Certainly Hillary is a better manager.”
John, it seems like you’re looking for the person who will be most effective at executing change and new legislation. Obama has a history of reaching across the aisle to help develop pass major legislative bills: he did this when protecting civil rights by implementing video cameras in police interrogation rooms in Illinois, and he did this when he passed comprehensive ethics reform — the most important piece of legislation on this subject to date — while in the Senate. Partisanship and bickering has long mired the politics of this country, and has stymied efforts to enact real change. Much of the Republican base is extremely anti-Hillary Clinton and are unwilling to work with her– it’s hard to imagine that she can get much accomplished when neither she nor her husband were able to unite the country behind a single vision. Remember that Clinton was a conservative Democrat president, who was blocked in many of his initiatives by a highly reluctant Republican House.
We need someone who’s tough, that’s true. But Obama is tough — not in withstanding Republican attacks, but in getting Republicans to put down their guns and come to the negotiating table.
With that in mind, Obama’s record of unification represents our best chance at changing this country.
Case closed:
Judgment to the Democratic Party.
As of the post-Kodak Theater “debate” tonight, the above is moot, as in:
Clinton/Obama and/or Obama/Clinton.
Tbe “dream ticket.” “Team”? That too.
It oinly remains for Wednesday nest to see who”s “on top” and whether John Edwardses “white” “populism” will also be sub-bannered on the party platform.
Now, if only someone would stand up to be accounted for as AGAINST pre-emptive first-strike idiocies and FOR the beginning of a dialog with those who see all of us as theoneocon fanatics.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Jenn, remember was it? Hseung-hui Cho. No one in this country is exempt from the madness of guns, and EVERYone is subject to the “prohibitions” of “illegal” drugs vis-a-vis those promulgated by the licensed pharmaceuticals. And all should have read that recent online Counterpunch piece by a knowledgeable insider about the CIA and the DEA AND the fact that at least one of our “intelligence” agencies has long been complicit with the ILlegal variety. Rush shops prescription types, Bennett gambles? as well as incites assassinations, and dry-drunks are finally talking about their probs before they were “reborn.”
John Lynn is apparently enamored with our “Model Minority” stereotype. It’s people like him that harm our community because rather than face the real problems in our community, he wants to embrace the “white-friendly” stereotypes that all Asians are smart, successfull, and good at math.
You won’t have to wait until next issue. Just go to http://www.amok.asianweek.com. My new blog reveals the winner of last night’s debate.
Jenn: Thank you very much for your explaination. Since Sen. Obama has already signed the questionnaire, I have nothing to complain anymore. Now I think Obama and Hillary are both good for Asian Americans, better than any republicans. What you said is reasonable. But now my priority is to help Democrates to get elected. I may vote following the polls that show who is more electable in the general election.
Dear fellow Asian Americans,
Over the past two months, some of you who do not understand the mission of 80-20 raised doubts about the approach of 80-20 in seeking equal opportunity and justice on your behalf. A few wondered why we put so much emphasis on a questionnaire and why a presidential candidate would bother with it. To these friends, I say, please stay close and watch. Our quest is a long ongoing journey, but every year, we are making steady progress. The forward steps we gain pre-election will take on landmark importance when a candidate committed to work with us (signified by answering all “Yes” to our questionnaire) becomes the next President . Please see the announcement below from 80-20. Then join us at http://www.80-20initiative.net and do your part in this fight with your donation and membership. Thank you.
Ed
Dr. Edward Lin
Director
80-20 Initiative (http://www.80-20initiative.net)
Equal Opportunity and Justice for ALL Asian Americans
Encourage Inspire Empower
“You must be the change you wish to see in the world” Mahatma Gandhi
January 31, 2008
After negotiations between 80-20 and the Obama campaign, 80-20 has
agreed to modify the wording of two questions in its questionnaire. With
these modifications, the Obama campaign has agreed to answer yes to all
of the questions in the questionnaire. 80-20 appreciates the Obama
campaign s efforts to reach an amicable solution and applauds the
campaign for reaffirming its strong commitment to increasing the number
of Asian Americans in the federal judiciary and the enforcement of
Executive order 11246 to ensue equal opportunity for Asian Americans in
work places.
80-20 considers the commitment from Senator Obama to Asian
American issues to be at least as strong as the commitment from Senator
Clinton, Senator Edwards, and Governor Richardson. Henceforth, with the
exception of California, 80-20 is neutral in the primary contests between
Senator Clinton and Senator Obama.
OLD Q4 If elected, will you within your first term of office increase the
nomination of qualified Asian Americans to serve as Article III life-tenured
federal judges, whenever such vacancies are available until the current
dismal situation is significantly remedied? [To put things in perspective,
not meaning to imply quota, presently there are 0.6% Asian Am. Federal
judges, while the Asian Am. population is 4.5% and the % of Asian Am
legal professionals in laws firms of 100 or larger is at least 5.3%.]
NEW Q4: If elected, will you make it a top priority of your Administration
to nominate qualified Asian Americans to serve as Article III life-tenured
District Court federal judges, whenever such vacancies are available?
OLD Q5: If elected, will you nominate within your first term of office
qualified Asian Americans to serve as Article III Circuit Judges, whenever
there are vacancies in those positions, until the current dismal situation is
significantly remedied? [To put things in perspective, none of the 179
Article III Circuit judges is an Asian American.]?
NEW Q5 : If elected, will you make it a top priority of your Administration
to nominate qualified Asian Americans to serve as Article III Circuit
Judges, whenever there are vacancies in those positions?
To see Sen. Obama’s signed reply, please click on
http://www.80-20initiative.net/news/preselect2008.asp .
80-20 wishes to thank Dr. John Levinson of Delaware and Chris Lu of
Senator Obama’s campaign for their great effort in seeking a win-win
solution. The above described agreement not only helps Asian
Americans achieve equal opportunity but also helps nudge America
towards “a more perfect Union.”
Now that the two remaining Democratic presidential candidates have
both replied to 80-20’s questionnaires with all yeses, 80-20 will focus on
getting the Republican presidential candidates to make the same
commitment. We urge all Asian Americans to work with 80-20 to achieve
that noble goal that will be so beneficial to our children. History
beckons. UNITED, we shall overcome.
Joyfully yours,
S.B. Woo, Exec. Comm., 80-20 PAC, Inc.
Lieutenant Governor of Delaware (1985-89)
Email: sbw@80-20.us
Dr. Lin,
It’s NOT that Asian Americans don’t understand 80-20. That point wasn’t the issue surrounding the controversy in the last two months. It was 80-20’s specific, and continuing unfounded actions to viciously attack one Democratic candidate that was in question.
At this junture though, given the recent response from the Obama campaign, there is some conditional kudos for 80-20 for facing the realities of facts and push-back about Obama and the Questionnaire.
But, what’s with the “except” California primaries, where 80-20 is still intent on carrying through with their “defeat Obama” and misinformation?
The issue remains that 80-20 is now responsible to “undo” their lies about Obama, whom they don’t quite know what to do with since they’ve affirmatively endorsed Clinton.
I, and many Asian Ameircans expect 80-20 to make available to the public, the SAME efforts in touting Obama’s YESes on every major Asian American newspaper (AsianWeek, World Journal, Asian American Press, etc). If not, there is serious inconsistency and bias that will have to be remedied.
It is my hope now that 80-20 will launch similar ly vicious attacks on the Republican candidates without delay!
If not, all criticisms of 80-20 still stands, and it still have a long way to go to earn the credibility and integrity it purports in representing “all Asian Americans.”
John - I’m glad you have nothing else to complain about, but there’s one thing I’d like you to do for all of us, eat your own words. Yes, all the stuff you said about Obama, eat it.
AsianWeek Endorses Obama for President!
Even with Emil’s continuous snub of Obama, and 80-20’s campaign against Obama on behalf of “all Asian Americans”, it’s refreshing to see AsianWeek put some balance and perspective into this equation of who should be the next President of the United States.
AsianWeek, “the oldest and largest English language newspaper serving the Asian/Pacific Islander American community,” wrote:
“U.S. Senator Barack Obama is the first-ever presidential candidate of color to have a broad base of support throughout America. A native Hawaiian, Obama’s personal and political background reflects the multicultural future of America. The energy Obama has ignited among young Asian Pacific American activists is unprecedented for presidential politics and could pave the way for future APA involvement.”
Guys still against me: I changed my stand to support Sen. Obama because he changed his on Equal Oppornity issue after he heard 80-20’s complains, including my daily essay. So I won the debate because I have achieved my goal: to get him to sign. You guys lost debate but win an actual benefit: get a better chance to be promoted to manager.
My job is well done. Bye-bye.
Actually, this whole controversy was very helpful because it showed me how deceitful the leadership of 80-20 is. I don’t care to be lied to, -especially by those who annoint themselves the spokesman for the Asian American community.
Obama is not any more or against supporting the Asian community now than he was before he signed the questionaire. Neither is Hillary Clinton.
This questionaire was always about 80-20 making a power-grab by fabricating a controversy in order to galvinize the community towards supporting the candidate 80-20 wanted. Their deceitful methods have not gone unnoticed.
Readers:
For an update on my column, check out my blog at:
http://amok.asianweek.com/
Emil
“Sen. Obama because he changed his on Equal Oppornity issue after he heard 80-20’s complains, including my daily essay.”
Senator Obama’s stance on equal opportunity never wavered. His problem with the questionnaire has always been its inclusion of unconstitutional quotas. And that is the part that 80/20 finally conceded on, allowing Obama to sign it.
“So I won the debate because I have achieved my goal: to get him to sign. You guys lost debate but win an actual benefit: get a better chance to be promoted to manager.”
Yeah, that makes no sense, whatsoever. John Lynn, every point you’ve raised has been well refuted by other folks on this thread. And clearly, posting here had absolutely nothing to do with the agreement reached between Obama and 80/20. How do you declare victory in a game you weren’t even playing?
Is 80-20 going to even try to mend the damage they’ve cause with their month-long Obama smear campaign? All the Chinese/Asian newspapers, talk radio, TV interviews? The answer is NO. Regardless of their official stance on Obama now, the damage may already be done and they certainly WILL NOT put in the same amount of fervor into it, if at all.
Why? I’m sure people like Amok and leaders of 80-20 will still feel a certain amount of petty resentment. People like Emil will assume that Obama signed because his camp suddenly (days before Feb 5th) realized that “marginalized” Asians can swing the vote in CA. The flaw in that logic is that you’re assuming Hillary’s early signage was a blood oath, and that Obama cares nothing for the plight of Asian Americans and other minorities. Snubbing of 80-20 does not equate to the snubbing of Asian Americans … let’s get that straight. 80-20 is a joke of an organization and so is Emil’s articles.
Don’t blame Obama for “taking too long to sign the agreement.” Both Hillary and Obama had to modify the language of the questionnaire before they could sign. Perhaps, if 80-20, with all their doctors, lawyers, and political experts, wrote up the questionnaire properly in the first place, he would’ve signed a long time ago …
so is emil’s last name guillermo? or amok?
[…] Emil Guillermo wrote in AsianWeek that Obama might not AsAm’s interests at heart. Guillermo wrote, “there’s real evidence that it would be wrong to assume that Obama is a “rainbow” guy, or that he would even address serious Asian American concerns” citing the alleged snub of the 80-20 questionnaire and wondering what has he done for them lately. […]
do you not remember how the clinton administration mistreated wen ho lee? and made him into a scapegoat in order to escape responsibility? a judge had to apologize to wen ho lee for the clinton administration’s abuse of power.
what would you rather have another white run america?
I don’t agree that Obama is “snubbing” Asians. I think that is merely the perception of the author. Mr. Obama has my support, my vote, and my respect and I hope that other Asian Americans recognize the fine mind he has and the fresh approach to political problems Hillary lacks.
Asian Americans should NOT assume that Obama’s candidacy will open doors for all minorities. We should be well aware that in this country, all minorities are not created equal and some get more respect than others. Asian americans, in spite of having high education, are continuously hitting a low glass ceiling. In general, a lot of asian americans have college degrees and yet we cannot be found anywhere in upper management, high political office, or even in the entertainment industry (EXCEPT those of us who are working behind rather than in front of the camera).
I think we need to stop kidding ourselves. Obama is not going to be doing us any favors and although I support hillary, i doubt she’d do us any favors either.
I am really astounded how so many people are influenced by rhetoric. Each of you, please be honest with everyone and advise what is your political interest in having Obama elected president. The writer is correct that Asian Americans are not represtented in the important categories. Why has there yet been an asian Justice on the Supreme Court? I do not recall there ever being a serious candidate. Nor are there enough judges representing the asian people of America. Obama is not the answer. Juan Williams is correct in his on his analysis of Obama; essentially, he used race as a crutch to climb the political ladder and now claims to be the “Rainbow” candidate in an attempt to distance himself from Rev. Wright. For 20 years he has had a significant relationship with this church and pastor. But only now when Rev. Wright is inconvenient to his political agenda he now abandons his “crazy uncle.” Michelle Obama admits that this is the first time she is proud to be an American, that is, only when her husband is on his way to become the democratic nominee. Not when she had the fortunate opportunity to attend and graduate Princeton University, or live a lavished life as a successful attorney in “America.” In any event, why would you think that his election will benefit the Asian American? Although we are a diverse minority in America, we have generally been successful as it pertains to keeping family, education, and ethics as a strong hold. Our interests are different than the elitist left wing of american politics. We are grouped into the category of minority only when it is self supporting by those categorizing. Therefore, I once again ask you to reveal your self interest in support of Obama and avoid the political game. I think as an Asian American we can show a better way of leadership.
AE
Funny, the only time you don’t blame white people is the time when mr. Obana is ‘racist’ to you. Where the darn do you get off thinking that he is anything short of inciteful and brilliant. He did something mao would gave been proud of, took an opportunity (bush being a fcking moron) and capitalized upon it. Mao did a coup in a factionalized china. O and barack obama isn’t shunning your people, it’s just the white blood in him hating your people. Did it ever occur to chinese that defend their goosestepping paramilitary government of peoples republic (i won’t finish with china becausw i don’t actually view communism as a humanistic government anymore, ir ever, obama, like most whites have more to worry about then the next chinese person to make fun of. Of you had it so tough here in america, not like the indians or africans or irish, o wait you did. Quiting hating start relating.
I’m Asian American and there is no way I am voting for Obama.
Why do we need to accommodate illegals?
Nonsense.
I know white people who have more Hawaiian blood than Obama. To call him a “native Hawaiian” is really stretching it - just because he once lived there. I guess that makes all the military men and their families “native Hawaiians”.
Anyone who complains about racism as much as he does is really a weakling.
Our relatives combatted actual racism in their lives - and won by remaining strong and plunging ahead. They also spoke little of their problems - if at all!
I cannot support anyone in 2008 who still cries and whines about their mistreatment due to race.
We are now entering Phase III. Stop the race whining and get on with life. And that includes YOU!
OK Lei, so go ahead and vote for the guy who calls you a GOOK.
Of course race is an issue in the election. To say it isn’t shows that:
1.) you know nothing about the history of this country and have never opened up a history book
2.) you don’t read the newspaper or watch the news
3.) you’re a troll sent by the mccain camp
4.) you just don’t know what the hell you’re talking about
go ahead and vote for the guy who called you a GOOK, noone’s stopping you. but don’t expect us not to laugh at you.
well so many mouth so many opinion,obama is somewhat good i mean he is providing tax relief to middlemen in fact the whole needy person from his country he is thinkin about them. it so good to know that he is as sincere with his country as pakistani leaders are inscere with his soil.obama can do anything to save his country on the other hand pakistani president would do anything to ruin his country.there is world of difference between zardari and obama.he is loyall ,he is fraud.nobody is thinkin of humanity and peace.no one is here for other.the cries of common subject of this planet are unheared.the question is who is responsible for this ,we are responsible for this american themselves are accountable for this .we have ignored our religion we have forgotten our traditions .in a nutshell we lost since we dont have faith in our allah that means taqwah all solutions are around it and vice versa.