Hacienda-La Puente, California School Board Member Jay Chen this week announced his run for California’s 39th Congressional District. His announcement is posted on his campaign site and blog as well as his background:

Jay Chen, a Democrat, was raised and educated in Hacienda Heights. A first-generation American, Jay’s parents came to the United States from Taiwan to seek a better future and taught him the value of hard work, the importance of a good education and the responsibility to serve the community. A product of the public school system, Jay earned a scholarship to Harvard University.

After graduating with honors he worked in the business world as a strategy consultant to Fortune 500 companies. Today, Jay is a successful small businessman and serves our country as an intelligence officer in the United States Naval Reserve.  He was elected to the Hacienda-La Puente Unified School District Board of Education in 2007 and after four years of academic success and innovation in the district, he was re-elected with the top vote in 2011.

If his name sounds familiar, it’s because I covered Chen when he interviewed for The Daily Show regarding the “controversy” of his school district’s ““Confucius Classroom” – Chinese language programs partially funded by Chinese government. Chen’s background sounds pretty solid, if not a little too perfect – almost like California State Senator Ted Lieu.

Chen will be going up against an incumbent Republican Congressman, Representative Ed Royce, who has been in Washington for over twenty years and already has $3 million for his re-election campaign. Another challenge that Chen faces is that his Congressional district is about 40 percent Republican and 32 percent Democrat. The district is close to 30% Asian, so Chen may pique the interest of some who may not have considered a Democrat. But no doubt about it, Chen has a huge challenge ahead of him.

[Photo courtesy of Jay Chen for Congress website]

Whenever I see an article like this titled “Filipino Cuisine Poised to Break through Gastro Ceiling,” I think “yet again?”  Over twenty years, I ate at Cafe Glenda on Solano Avenue in Berkeley and thought, “Has Filipino food finally made it?”   Efren wrote about Filipino Food becoming the In Thing four years ago.  A few years later came a discussion on how and why Filipino food was unassimilated.  So what’s new and different this time?

I think that a couple things are different now.  Vendors like the Adobo Hobo and many other Filipino restaurants have shown that Filipino food can be a viable option.  Filipino food is getting buzz at places the the Winter Fancy Food show, and a product line like Kusina ni Maria (Maria’s Kitchen) is now available in the Whole Food Markets grocery chain.  Even more extreme Filipino foods like Balut are being served in restaurants.

Filipino Food is also adapting to deal with mainstream American trends.  Chefs have been experimenting with adaptions to Filipino food to make it healthier.  There is now Vegan Filipino food, a concept which I still have problems wrapping my mind around.

Will Filipino food make it?  It would be great to see it happen and give  Filipino Entrepreneurs and Filipinos Americans in general more exposure.  Not far from where I live in Silicon Valley, there are Filipino restaurants that are making it and that I go to periodically.  I think that’s a positive sign, but I for now, I am going to wait and see before declaring Filipino cuisine as having it made it into the American Mainstream.

On Thursday, New York City Councilman Peter Koo of Flushing, Queens announced that he’s switched his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat. There are several reasons why he may have switched. Reports have surfaced that Koo had problems with the Queens County Republican Party. But more interestingly, some have speculated that Koo did it to increase his influence. As a Democrat, he could bring more city funds to his district. Moreover, he could serve as a mentor to young, up-and-coming Asian American political stars, who are largely Democrats.

Koo’s role as a highly influential senior statesman for APA politicos is important. This is especially true after recent reports that that New York City APAs are growing concerned about their political advancement following the fundraising scandal engulfing Comptroller John Liu, the current leading APA politician in New York.

For Koo, switching parties is a relatively risk-free proposition. It’s a lesson he learned in 2009 when he ran as a Republican. By running under the GOP banner, he was able to bypass the highly competitive Democratic Primary which included five candidates – four of them APAs. Then, in the general election, he beat his Democratic opponent with relative ease. (Koo also ran for the State Senate in 2008, but lost to the Democratic incumbent.)

So really, what are the downsides to Koo switching parties?

There are two drawbacks, but they shouldn’t really affect Koo. The first problem Koo may run into is that he might draw a Republican challenger during the next election. But if he had remained a Republican, he still would have drawn a challenger. Koo has more to fear from challengers coming from the left because Flushing has more registered Democrats. Besides, the 2009 Democratic Primary is proof of the large number of ambitious Democrats there are in Flushing.

The second problem is that Koo makes himself an easy target should he ever decide to run for higher office. His opponents may portray him as a flip-flopper who makes decisions based on political expediency. Republicans may use his previous positions against him in future general election campaigns. But Koo shouldn’t be worried. First, he’s unlikely to run for higher office. He’ll be 70 years old by the time term limits are up. Second, he’s already amassed a relatively moderate/liberal record as a city councilman.

It’s uncertain whether Koo ran as a Republican in 2009 just as a way to increase his chances at winning the seat. But now that he’s a councilman, it’s a smart political decision to switch parties. The downside is so limited but the upside is so great.

Minhee Cho made headlines after ordering pizza from Papa John’s and had her name misspelled as “Lady Chinky Eyes”. While I’m sure American Law gives the benefit of the doubt to the employee to defend herself as a mentally challenged and defective wart who ingested too much over-due pizza and had a cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction and carotid stenosis when typing it in, I’m more inclined to think it was somewhat slightly malicious in nature (in addition to the above).  Papa John’s pizza has issued an apology on Twitter and fired the employee responsible so kudos to them.

Surprisingly however, I’m not 100% offended (okay, if it happened to me I might actually go back and knock the crust outta the person) but having “Lady Chinky Eyes” put on a receipt as the customers name at a pizza store made me laugh. I did think though, just how did the term chink/y become “racist”? I decided to do some digging into the history of the word, and was rather surprised.

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, Chink dates from 1901 although Wikipedia sources place it further at 1878 and 1890. The actual origins are debated as well, from being the sound made by Chinese coolies building the Pacific railroads to a reference of the slanted eyes we are so famed for. Whatever the origins for the word, it has become a well-known slur, similar to the famous, dare I say it (I dare not) N-word. Aside from the obvious connection of offensiveness that is connotative with the word and the primary use as a derogative for Asians, “Chink” has a side of non-racism to it from the early days of creation of use up to modern times. An interesting use of the word however has arisen in the United Kingdom, where “Chink” is sometimes not only racist but accepted as a slang for the local Chinese takeaway. A complaint made to the BBC in 2002 highlighted how it was not the use but the intent that was relevant in determining offensiveness. Debatable indeed.

Other incidents where “Chink” has been used “inoffensively” in public include the old Pekin (Illinois) High School teams that used the name, Pekin Chinks (allegedly complete with students dressed as a Chinaman and a gong which was struck with every goal). This post of a former “Chink” claims they interpreted it as meaning “worker”, and not a derogatory term. Funnily enough, it may have be possible that with the early origins of the word potentially grounded in the labour of the railway workers, it could have become commonly accepted without malice as meaning a Chinese worker. Another example of where allegedly it’s not in an offensive context was when comedian Sarah Silverman used it in her routine. In her view, it was legitimate as an expression of free speech and she has a Asian fanbase that supported her (oh yes, those dolls of you with pins stuck in them is our way of saying you’re painfully good). I gotta say, she’s one dumb comedian. She should take some tips on making racial or religious joke from Russell Peters, who’s smart enough to bash everyone including himself the most without going overboard. There are incidents however, where it’s openly offensive.

The New York Hot 97 radio station broadcasted a song in 2005 which was a parody of “We are the world” and named “USA for Indonesia“. The lyrics were racially offensive and poked fun at those affected by the 2004 Tsunami, and included the all-popular word, “Chink”.  Whilst matters eventually proceeded with on-air spat with one DJ who was of Korean descent (Minya Oh aka Miss Info) and eventually culminated with  several members fired (one was hired by another station, what the hell!), the fact is that it was broadcasted to try and compete for ratings with another radio station. Amazing, those idiots at Hot 97 should go back to primary school. I’m also rather angry that Miss Jones, the “shock jock” (I’d like to give her a shock alright, 20,000 volts up the *censored*) never actually issued an apology and was actually described “professional” by Jill Strada, Program Director for 98.7 KISS FM, the hiring station. Humph. (I want to clarify, information from the above paragraph came primarily from Wikipedia or likewise sources, those interested should conduct their own research before forming a conclusion).

So back to the issue at hand, the use of Chink, Chinky and likewise words. It is racist? more often than not, yes. About the only time it’s not racist is when it comes from someone of the same racial background right? Enter in Wang Leehom. His use of the word comes in the hope that it will be cool one day. I’ll think about moving to Mars when Chink enters the vocabulary as a cool word. Having things like “Let’s go chink man” and “Alright, we’re chinked dude” would involve me ending up in jail with charges of 1st degree murder. I’m surprised, it’s a gutsy move.

Thus I hear you cry out in confusion,  is Chink and likewise words racist? My answer: yes, for the most part. While it can be slang for someone which doesn’t mean it to be offensive, the meaning and offensiveness is dictated by the audience, and while one day Wang Lee Hom might get his wish that it becomes “cool”,  for the moment it’s about as polite as using the N-word in front of a African American. I suggest even if you’re Asian by ethnicity, the use of the word only perpetuates its longevity and this is one word we could do without.

By Lexington

In recent years, there has been substantial press coverage predicting that the dramatic increase of New York’s Asian American (APA) population would lead to an increase in political influence. Yet that population increase hasn’t translated to greater APA representation in elected office. To date, there are currently four APA elected officials. Part of it may be low rates of voter registration and lack of interest in American politics. But when you look at the Bay Area and the Los Angeles area, you don’t see the same dearth of APA political representation. What makes New York different?

A federal lawsuit filed by AALDEF suggests a nefarious explanation. According to the complaint, the current district lines are drawn
in a way that dilutes APA voting power. Ten years ago, New York’s redistricting committee splintered APA neighborhoods and communities into separate voting districts. Although the committee is scheduled to release the new maps some time soon, it hasn’t happened yet. AALDEF has asked the court to appoint an independent “special master” to redraw district lines immediately.

The redistricting process for all states is always highly controversial. How district lines are drawn and redrawn always seem undemocratic. They’re designed to protect incumbents and political parties. The process happens largely behind closed doors. I would not be surprised if the court finds that New York’s redistricting committee ran roughshod over the APA community’s interests the last time around. Hopefully, this time, things will be different.

ABOUT LEXINGTON: Lexington once volunteered for an Asian American candidate for the New York City Council. He blogs about law, his childhood, and his observations about people at http://www.thelexingtonavenueblog.com.

I had blogged about this terrible accident in San Diego, California back in December of 2008, when an U.S. Marine F/A-18D Hornet crashed into a home and killed Korean immigrant Young Mi Yoon, her two daughters, and her mother; Young Mi Yoon’s husband, Dong Yoon, was at work when the crash occurred.

Three years to the month, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller, awarded the following damages:

“Don Yoon, whose wife, Youngmi; daughters, Rachel and Grace; and mother-in-law, Seokim Lee, perished in the crash, should receive $9.6 million in compensation. Miller ruled Sanhyum Lee, Seokim’s husband, should receive $3.7 million. Youngmi’s three siblings received $1.5 million each for the loss of their mother and sister.”

Before the trial, the U.S. government conceded it was at fault for the crash and the trial was a 2.5 day non-jury trial. The family had originally sued for $56 million in damages, but the government pushed back. To be honest, I wouldn’t even know how one can put a price on such a loss. And I can’t even imagine how one would emotionally recover from such a loss. Amazingly, Yoon reiterated what he said three years ago – “I still harbor no ill will against the U.S. Marine Corps pilot involved in this crash, who did everything he could to prevent this tragedy.”