Of course the WaPo never mentions in this report of racist attitudes that all the racism the Obama campaign received was coming from other Democrats:
For all the hope and excitement Obama’s candidacy is generating, some of his field workers, phone-bank volunteers and campaign surrogates are encountering a raw racism and hostility that have gone largely unnoticed — and unreported — this election season. Doors have been slammed in their faces. They’ve been called racially derogatory names (including the white volunteers). And they’ve endured malicious rants and ugly stereotyping from people who can’t fathom that the senator from Illinois could become the first African American president.
~~~Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, was on phone-bank duty one night during the Pennsylvania primary campaign. One night was all she could take: “It wasn’t pretty.” She made 60 calls to prospective voters in Susquehanna County, her home county, which is 98 percent white. The responses were dispiriting. One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn’t possibly vote for Obama and concluded: “Hang that darky from a tree!”
Documentary filmmaker Rory Kennedy, the daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy, said she, too, came across “a lot of racism” when campaigning for Obama in Pennsylvania. One Pittsburgh union organizer told her he would not vote for Obama because he is black, and a white voter, she said, offered this frank reason for not backing Obama: “White people look out for white people, and black people look out for black people.”
Obama campaign officials say such incidents are isolated, that the experience of most volunteers and staffers has been overwhelmingly positive
McQ notes that the majority of racism depicted in the article are anecdotes, hearsay, and history:
However, when it comes down to actually putting names to the incidents, only three anecdotes do that – and they’re all about Clinton supporters. That is to say, Democrats
Geez, I woulda thought it was only us Republicans who were the racists.
Oh, I’m not saying there are racists in this country. There always will be. But don’t gloss over the 92% of blacks that voted for Obama when you talk about racist. When almost a 100% of a certain race vote a certain way for another person of their same race, its not because of his policies.
And just wait till the general. The word “racism” will be thrown around like beads in New Orleans. Hope McCain is prepared.
See author page
Do you know the percentage of the African American vote that Kerry got? Gore?
A general election with two white males one Democrat, and one Republican. Majority of them went to a Democrat.
A Democrat primary, both Democrats, one white….one black. Almost 100% go to the black even tho they are both Democrats with almost the same governing philosophies.
You do the math.
Gore got 90% and Kerry 88%.
And wahtis your point Fit Fit. There are 2 people in the Democratic Primary and 92% of blacks voted for the Black candidate. No racism there. Move along. And I am sure that if Clinton was the nominee about 90%of Black votes would go her way.
And isn’t it funny how they always vote Democrats into power, and they get nothing for it. If it wasn’t for republicans in the 60s there would not be the Civil Rights Act, which was almost unanomously voted against by Democrats, and champoined by Republicans. But the Democrats have fooled them into thinking the Democrats really are going to help them, but in the end they only help the Democrats stay in power and do little for blacks or the poor in this country
You won’t find me defending either party on their great success in helping African Americans (or anyone else) in this country . The point is, in November, the African American vote will likely break the same as it has for the last few elections. I think it’s obvious that Obama benefited from racial identy politics in the primary. But what is Curt’s point in throwing out these 90% percentages as if they are completely unprecendented? Does Curt think calling blacks racist is a good way to attract African Americans into conservative politics?
Who said I was trying to attract them into the conservative fold. The Democrats have a death grip on them no doubt. My point was that the constant meme that Republicans are a bunch of racists is not a true meme. Racists exist inside the Democrat party, just look at the black racists in their own party who wont even consider a white woman…..all because of the color of her opponent.
Proving some Democrats are racist does mean some Republicans aren’t. Most Republicans I know are not racist, but most white racists I know are Republicans.
Most White RacistI know are Demcrats. Look at KKK Byrd, he was in the KKK. Look at Gore’s Father, he was one of those Democrats that voted against the Civil Rights Act. And Clinton’s mentor was a known racist. The only racists I know in the Republican Party are Buhchanan and Ron Paul who are both out of the mainstream of GOP politics. And Strom Thurmon is not in the Senate any more
And personally I know many more racist whites that are Democrats than racists Republicans.
I don’t know any of those people. I am speaking of the people I’ve met growing up in the Carolinas.
So you do not know who Al Gore is, or Senator Byrd the eldest member of the Democrats in the Senate.
Man that is sad if you want to follow politics and do not know who Robert KKK Burd is or Al Gore and Al Gore Sr.
How old are you??? Just wondering.
I know of all those people. I was born in the middle of Watergate.
Please i have argued this point untill i am blue in the face. The South gets a bad wrap as racist and republican but lets take a step back for a minute. I grew up in Alabama, born in Miss. Live in NY.
I have long argued that the south is the least racist area in the country. My points are that racial integration is the greatest in the south because we where initially forced. therefore we assosiate with people of different colors closely allowing differences to melt away. While middle americans grow up never even seeing a black person in real life. Also, the KKK headquarters moved out of the South and into the midwest. Another point is that where have all the most recent race riots been? (my Cal friends hate that point!)
Racism as a whole is dead in this country and the only ones that trumpette it are the ones that have profited off it. Racism is now an individual problem, and should be treated as such.
Finally, with all that said and all the race riots in recent memory being committed in Blue states i can only say that no one party holds any monopoly on racism. You will always have people that are racist but they are few and far between.
Scott J-
I think both the South and Republicans get the bad wrap. But your experiences don’t jive with mine on the “few and far between” bit.
The fact that the writer of this post would accuse African Americans of racism because 90% voted for Obama feeds into the stereotypes that some whites associate with African Americans; i.e., African Americans always vote for the black person running for office, regardless of their qualification. African Americans are politically monolithic, and the vast majority of African Americans hate white people. In other words, African Americans are dumb, lazy, and racist.
The fact of the matter is that African Americans voted for Senator Obama because they view him as a better candidate than Senator Clinton; as do the majority of the White Americans that voted in the Democratic primaries. The reason most African Americans vote Democrat is because their hasn’t been a viable alternative from the Republican side.
No African American in their right mind would vote for the party that gave America Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms and the other like minded avowed racists that permeate the Republican party. The Democratic party has issues too. However, in the last 40 years, they have been more responsive to the African American community and that is why most African Americans support the Democratic Party.
About the black vote many of you commented on…..it seems kind of absurd to accuse them of racism just because they vote for Obama. There is a difference between voting for someone because you feel an affinity with them (are women voting for Hillary all sexist?), and when you vote against someone because of an absurd hatred of their race, or gender, or faith. I haven’t seen any polling indicating that the driving force behind support for Obama in the black community is hatred of whites.
One other thing to mention about the black vote – if you look at the polling numbers from end of last year, beginning of this year, the majority of the black vote was for Hillary. It was only as the community learned more about Obama as a candidate that is shifted to him. And then after Bill and Hillary started making stupid comments about Obama and race, the #s shifted dramatically.
And by the way, I don’t think anyone was naive enough to believe that racism was some sort of Republican problem. It is just as pervasive among Democratic voters.
Did you know that all of those people you said were first Democrats.
Aside form that, I really want to know what havethe Democrats deon that is so good for the African Americans. They have made them slaves to the government by welfare, and far more African American children are born without fathers, because welfare will give more money to fatherless children. Is there less poverty in the AfricanAmerican community because of all these great programs by the Left in this country. No.
And who was it that pushed through the Civil Rights Act, it wasn’t Democrats. Who was it that wants to fullfil Martin Luther King’s dream of a colorless society, I think it is the Republicans. We do not see anyone’s skin color, you are judged by what you do, not by the color of your skin. The Democrats judge people by groups, they are African American, Females, Latinos. Isee them all as Americans, nothing more nothing less. They arejudgedby character, not ethnicity, gender, race cre4ed or wahtever else you wantto qualify them by. A colorblind society, isn’t that what MArtin Luther King and the Civil Right Movement was all about. Not putting one person ahead of another because of Race, Gender or Creed. Well my friend that is exactly what the Democrats have foistered onto our society.
Of course the WaPo never mentions in this report of racist attitudes that all the racism the Obama campaign received was coming from other Democrats:
Duhhhhh, isn’t that sort of, ummmm, implicit in the fact that this is the DEMOCRATIC primaries, so obviously Obama campaign workers were contacting registered DEMOCRATS?
Give me a break:
Your trying to tell me 92% of a certain race view Obama as better qualified, a man with almost no accomplishments, compared to the white lady who has quite a bit more qualifications….give me a break. Their voting based on skin color which is racist.
“as do the majority of the White Americans that voted in the Democratic primaries”
I don’t think the Obamessiah has won the “majority of the white vote” in any primary except VA. Outside of that, the highest number I have found is just over 40%.
Sorry.
You’ll have to prove that one.
***
Interestingly you chose to mention Strom Thurmond (a former Democrat) and Jesse Helms while ignoring a much longer list of other very recognizable names.
I wonder why.
Do you really want to get into comparisons of which political party has done more for the advancement and equal treatment of blacks?
You probably don’t because I can assure you that the facts are much different than your perceptions.
DELETED BY USER
Curt,
I know that individuals like yourself find it difficult to believe that African Americans actually listen to and can make decision based upon the information given to them by a candidate. Notwithstanding your disbelief in the aforementioned premise, this is actually what has happened in the case of Obama vs. Clinton. Whether you believe it or not does not make it any less truer. It just makes you look foolish. Because based upon your absurd premise, 92% of African Americans are not only racist, they’re stupid too. Not even David Duke believes that.
*SMH*
In light of the markedly unbalanced numbers it is easy to see that Curt may indeed have a valid point.
Whether you believe it or not does not make it any less truer. The sheer numerical differences belie your position.
Aye Chihuahua,
Yes I knew that Jesse and Strom were both dems before they changed to republicans. Did you know that Helms and Strom (and a whole bunch of other avowed racist politicians) became republicans after Jim Crow was abolished? I wonder why? Could it have been that they felt more comfortable being avowed racists in the republican party? Things that make you go hmmmmm….
Anyway my friend the fact is as I stated very clearly in my first response, I believe that the democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin. That is why I am an independent. My purpose for commenting in this thread was to contra pose a viewpoint to the author’s premise. As far as this writer is concerned, democrats nor republicans care about anything other than making money for their corporate sponsors and spending our money on unnecessary horsepuckey.
The vast majority of the 92% of African Americans that support Obama perceive him to be the better candidate. There are probably no more African Americans voting for Obama because he is black, than it is whites voting for Hillary, Paul, and McCain because they are white/female. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous and plays into the ignorant, boot licking and uninformed negro stereotype and I could not let that absurdity go unchallenged.
Aye Chihuahua,
You wrote – “In light of the markedly unbalanced numbers it is easy to see that Curt may indeed have a valid point. Whether you believe it or not does not make it any less truer. The sheer numerical differences belie your position.”
Response – Not really. The premise that 92% of African Americans are racist and support Obama because he is the same color as them is an absurdity beyond psycho-social comprehension. But you’re free to believe what you want to believe.
If your premise were true then Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Shirley Chisolm, Carol Mosley Braun, and Alan Keyes should have receive 92% of the African American vote when they ran for President. They did not. As such, their is no precedent for you and any other like minded individuals to grasp hold too that supports your premise. Unless you have some information or historical trend to support your position, you may want to rethink it.
Heru, so you’re saying that the AA voters are “differently smart” than white voters because they picked Obama purely based only on his great achievements in such high numbers?
You know what buddy, it’s clear as day to anyone with half a brain that it’s racial solidarity. This is not DailyKos so your politically correct points won’t find a lot of support.
Heru, your last point is absurd. To claim, for instance, that white racists are not really racists because they will vote for David Duke in higher numbers than for some liberal Catholic from New York makes no sense because they do see other factors besides race.
I’m not looking for support my friend. Nor am I a supporter of political correctness in any form or fashion. Additionally I did not write, intimate, or even suggest that AA voters are “differently smart” than white voters. What I did write was that to the vast majority of AA voters, Obama is clearly the better candidate and unless you or any other person can at least cite a precedent (there aren’t any…btw) to support the absurdity that suggest that 92% of AA voters are racist and support Obama because he’s black, then you are simply wrong on this.
Igor,
I made no such claim. Please read my post again….
I didn’t really know where to post this until I saw the category “culture” and thought, ‘that’s actually pretty appropriate’.
Here’s Josh Marshall on what just happened in Mississippi:
Absolutely amazing; it’s a political ‘culture’ shift away from Republicans.
Just to clarify the record a bit.
Helms never held office as a Democrat. He ran for the Senate, as a Republican, for the first time in 1972, hardly the height of racial tension in this country.
Thurmond changed parties in 1964 which was about the same time that the Democrats were doing everything they could to resist Civil Rights efforts.
Thurmond then went on to support the extension of the Voting Rights Act, and voted to honor MLK, Jr. with a federal holiday. He was a defender of blacks against lynching and poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats.
In addition he hired African-American staffers, endorsed racial integration in the 1970s, enrolled his white daughter in an integrated public school, and supported blacks being appointed to the federal bench.
In light of that record his views of race certainly moderated over the years. Your contention that he was “more comfortable being [an] avowed racists in the republican party” is certainly not supported by his actions.
***
In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.
www [dot] congresslink [dot] org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm
“If your premise were true then Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Shirley Chisolm, Carol Mosley Braun, and Alan Keyes should have receive 92% of the African American vote when they ran for President. They did not. As such, their is no precedent for you and any other like minded individuals to grasp hold too that supports your premise.”
***
The fact is that Jackson did capture 92% of the black vote when he ran in 1988.
www [dot] time [dot] com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1581666,00.html
So, there’s the precedent.
***
I didn’t do any research into the other candidates that you listed since it is getting late and I have work tomorrow but I will see what I can dig up.
From the Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, Tom Cole, about today’s special election in Mississippi and the challenges that lay ahead:
Aye Chihuahua
No problemo mi amigo. In the case of election 1984, Jesse received the AA vote because he was a viable candidate (like Obama) and not because he was simply black. If the AA’s that supported Jesse were racist, then Mondale would not have received 90% of the AA vote; nor would any other white candidate prior to and after Mondale. Additionally in the same article you cited, Al Sharpton had kinder words for Edwards then he did for Obama. So called liberal AA’s such as Andrew Young, Bob Johnson, Tavis Smiley and others support Clinton as well.
When Hillary and Bill interjected race into the mix in January (?) that is when we saw the numbers rise for Obama. Before that point, Hillary enjoyed a majority percentage of AA voters as opposed to Obama. From that point forward however, Hillary has seen a steady decline in AA support. One can’t piss off one’s constituency and expect them to vote for you.
Additionally Obama is not the presumptive Democratic nominee simply because AA’s voted for him. He is the nominee because the majority of Democrats believe in his message and believe that he can win the general election. The majority of voters that support Clinton believe in her message too. However we know at least 18% in PA voted for Hillary because she was white. Maybe the same number of AA’s voted for Obama for the same reason. I can accept that argument. However to write that 92% of AA’s are racist because they voted for Obama is offensive to the nth degree and de-legitimizes (if you will) African American’s intelligence and decision making capabilities. And that is wrong my friend no matter what side of the political aisle one may stand on.
Heru Ammen,
When a distribution deviates so drastically from the expected by being strongly skewed in a particular direction, it indicates the distribution isn’t “random,” i.e., that there is something “biasing” the data.
Since O’Bummer is no different in his far Left message than any other far Left Demokrat nut case, it can’t be the message. To test for that, one looks at how he’s received by Whites and Blacks separately. The fact that the split among White Demokrats is about what one would expect, indicates that the message to groups differing only in Color is being received differently.
Color is then the variable upon which the results strongly depend.
But I need to get better and more current numbers to see if that is actually what is happening on a large scale, and not just in the few areas that I’ve seen it.
A further proof can be brought if one can show an overt racism among Blacks that one doesn’t find among Whites. That can be seen at a mostly Black fund raiser, ” Comedian Chris Rock, who introduced the candidate, told the crowd they will regret it if Obama wins and they had voted for Sen. Clinton, the Democratic front-runner. “You’d say, ‘I had that white lady! What was I thinking?’ ” Rock joked.
Most whites shrug that off as that’s just their sense of humor. But, after hearing Wright and other popular black leaders speak, I realize it is RACIST! And if they aren’t uncomfortable laughing at a “joke” like that in public, they certainly won’t be inhibited when they are voting in private.
Do you think that we are saying that all the AA that vote for Obamassiah is racist. WE never said that. But when you get 92% of any polulation it is nit normalm, unless you are in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was on the one vted for. So, if 92% of Whtes voted for Hillary nwould you consider that racist or just that the Whites just thought she was better??? It is amzing that people do not see the racism in the AA commuity. Look at Rev Wright, Al Sharpton, Louie Farakan, and all the other race baiters.
As I hav said before I could care less about someone’s color or ethnicity. It is what they are for. And 92% of any population for one person over another is not the norm. I reiterate if 92% of Whtes voted for Hillary, woukld you consider that racist. I think it would and would think that it would be s sh ame that they would do that.
But of course, AA can not be racist because of they haved been put down for so long. If Colon Powell or Condi Rice would run they would be called uncle Toms because they are not the right kind of Black politician. Just look at what Rev Wright called Condi, Codaskeeza. Or look at some of the ;olitical cartoons they have made of Colon powell, JC Watts, Lt Gov Steele. But there is no racism in the AA communityt though to you. They just want the gravy trin to keep rolling in from the government. The Democrats have ruined the lives of more AA than any Republican by giving keeping them beholden to the gopvenment for all of their needss and not helping them get out of the lower class. It is a shame that MLK dream has died and we hafvve come to this.
He had a dream of a color blind society, but the so-called AA leaders are all race baiters that keep racism alive.
stix1972
“He had a dream of a color blind society, but the so-called AA leaders are all race baiters that keep racism alive.”
He would be called an “uncle tom” today, because as a thoughtful and caring man, naturally …he was a Republican.
Chris-#15
Some good points, with which I would partially agree.
But there are real White/White bias and Black/Black bias, but the Black/Black bias appears measurably much more pronounced, at least if I’m reading this graph correctly.
And it’s too bad the voters who are “learning” about Obama are getting their info from the Obama campaign and the MSM, otherwise I am confident (hopeful, anyway) that many would stay away from him. Of course the Wright nonsense doesn’t seem to have affected his numbers, so maybe I am being more hopeful than realistic with that expectation.
There is more than adequate data to support the premise that was being presented.
You started out by saying that for the argument to be valid there must be a precedent. Then when a precedent was presented you switched to saying that Jackson got votes because he was “viable”.
Saying that Jackson received 92% because he was “viable” is laughable. Anyone who knows politics knows that Jackson was never “viable” and has never been elected to anything.
Then you switch your argument to say that if race was a factor Mondale would not have gotten 90%. That’s a false premise as well. Who else would they have voted for? Mondale was the white guy in the race. There was no black guy to choose.
In fact, that argument is just as false as using Keyes as an example. He is Republican.
***
Race may or may not be the driving factor. There are a lot of indicators that point in that direction. Whether blacks “chose” the Obameiester just because of his skin color or whether they flocked to him due to the racial stirring of the Clintons, I am not sure. In any case it certainly cannot be ignored or wished away.
Either way race plays into it heavily.
When you strip away the race and gender differences of these two, they are essentially the same candidate, pushing for the same issues, and using the same techniques and rhetoric. Neither brings a distinguished list of accomplishments to the table. Both are dramatically left of center. Therein lie my problems with both of them. It’s not race or gender. It’s issues.
Obie’s vote percentages among whites as well as the number of people who have said that they will either sit it out or cross over if he is the nominee should be enough to give the Dems pause.
The thing they have to remember is that their party cannot win without the white vote. Even 100% of the black vote will not be enough.
So is there really a difference between “racial identity politics” and racism?
I don’t think so.
Malageny
“So is there really a difference between “racial identity politics” and racism?
I don’t think so.”
This will be the Democrats downfall. Identity politics sorks if you have the White Candidate thatis supposedly forthe AA, Women, Latinos or whatever other groups you can come up with. Identity Politicsis exactly what I was talking about. that is what the Democrat Party is all about. they put peopl into groups, not individuals, andI think that that is racist in itself. On the other side, conservatives judge and look at people as individuals.
Yonason,
When people choose to run for office, they come before the people and make their case as to why the people should elect them. This is what all of the presidential candidates have done and the ones that are still running have made their case better than the ones that aren’t running. (I know my analogy is over simplistic here. But hear me out) To suggest that AA’s don’t think, do research, and then make a decision based upon the issues on the same level as all racial groups in this country is simply wrong.
We are not monolithic. Quite frankly if the Republican party would stick to fiscal conservatism and quit trying to be the party of God’s Holy Word as defined by southern baptists, there would be more AA’s republicans in this country. But the fact that AA’s had every facet of their lives directed by southern style social conservatism for over 300 years from slavery to Jim Crow is the main reason why very few AA’s identify with the republican party.
Senator Obama’s message has been accepted by the majority of Democratic voters. Whether one agrees with his political views or not, he obviously has earned the respect and admiration of the majority of Democratic voters. That can’t be taken away from him. So suggesting that AA’s voted for him based on the color of his skin (and not for the same reasons that whites voted for him) is wrong.
Aye Chihuahua,
I’ve seen no one give a precedent that supports the author’s contention. AA’s supported Jesse Jackson in ’84 because he was a viable choice. Additionally, Jesse could not have won any state primary with only AA support. Whites voted for him too. Shirley Chisolm, Carol Mosley Braun, Al Sharpton nor Alan Keyes received 90% of the AA vote when they ran simply because they weren’t perceived as viable candidates. Additionally, if Senator Obama doesn’t win the nomination, I can guarantee you that Cynthia McKinney won’t get 90% of the AA vote either.
In reference to your Mondale analogy, if the majority of AA voters were truly racist, then they would have fielded another AA candidate and voted for the black candidate instead of Mondale or sat home and didn’t vote for anyone. Racism is a system that perpetuates itself upon the belief of cultural, religious, and class superiority of one group of people over another. That is certainly not the case for the vast majority of AA’s. Nor is it the case for the vast majority of whites.
Most folks in this country want good jobs an/or the opportunity to run a business. They want good schools for their children, cheap gas, and the opportunity to enjoy the American way of life. African Americans are no different in that respect and we have no special or hidden agenda to get unqualified AA’s elected President. We vote like everyone else in this country and if Hillary didn’t inject race into this election, she would be enjoying more support amongst AA’s.
Heru Ammen,
“…[T]he fact that AA’s had every facet of their lives directed by southern style social conservatism for over 300 years from slavery to Jim Crow is the main reason why very few AA’s identify with the republican party.”
Whoa, hold it RIGHT there! Are we living on the same planet?
Don’t you know that it was the Southern DEMOCRATS who were the slave holders? Are you so unaware that the Democrats are the ones who gave America Jim Crow? Are you that uninformed? (I’m not trying to convey anger, but astonishment, just in case that isn’t coming through too clearly).
The Republican party was founded to oppose Democrats who wanted to expand slavery into the new Western territories that were opening up at that time. Lincoln was a Republican, not a Democrat. Why do you think MLK was a Republican?! Because the Democrats were nearly all racists!
You tell me the AA community “researches” a candidate, and I have no doubt they do. But if all the information they have to go on is what is spoon fed them by their racist leaders (like Jackson, Rengel, Al (HymieTown*) Sharpton,”Reverand” Jeremiah (HateAmerica) Wright, Obama, etc., etc.,) and the Leftist MSM, there’s no way they will have the information they need.
There is so much material on this, and, time permitting I can get some more links for you later today or tomorrow.
Take a look at the graph I posted in #37, above. It shows that AA bias is running at roughly 5 times that of White! [If B&W were equally biased, the line would go through x=50, not x=10. If there were no bias, the slope would be zero.] And I am not saying it is racism, necessarily, but the IS a very profound and measurable BIAS. What it comes from, I don’t know. But it is there, and until we recognize that, we won’t be able to fix it.
So, before you start lecturing people about facts, first get your own facts straight, please.
———————————————————
* NOTE – (to a Jew, “Hymie” is one of many equivalents to the “N”-word for an AA.)
“But the fact that AA’s had every facet of their lives directed by southern style social conservatism for over 300 years from slavery to Jim Crow is the main reason why very few AA’s identify with the republican party.”
Oh come on now.
You’ve got to be kidding me.
Anyone who makes that sort of revisionist statement is either woefully misinformed or willingly trying to fool anyone who will listen.
Jim Crow laws were brought to you by, and supported by Dems. The Civil Rights movement was opposed at every turn by, guess who, the Dems. Who currently has a former member of the KKK serving in the Senate? You guessed it. The Dems. Guess who brought you the KKK. Which political party honored the KKK at their convention. Same answer.
There is a massive amount of information out there which confirms every single thing that I am saying if you wish to look for it. Even a couple of cursory Google searches will inform you if you wish to learn about it.
“Senator Obama’s message has been accepted by the majority of Democratic voters.”
What, exactly, is Obie’s message and how, precisely, is it different than Hilda’s?
I contend that they are one in the same.
“Most folks in this country want good jobs an/or the opportunity to run a business. They want good schools for their children, cheap gas, and the opportunity to enjoy the American way of life. African Americans are no different in that respect and we have no special or hidden agenda to get unqualified AA’s elected President.”
Please elucidate, in detail, how the message being presented by either of the Dem candidates for President will assist people in accomplishing the goals that you have laid out.
Also, please establish for me the Constitutional role of gov’t in providing for “good jobs, business “opportunity”, “good schools”, and “cheap gas”.
I contend that the gov’t has NO role in any of these things. Quite the contrary. If the gov’t would get out of people’s way and allow them to pursue their goals we, the American people, black, white, and every other color, would be better off.
You won’t get that with a Dem candidate who wants to tax and punish accomplishment.
Yonason
Yes I do know that it was democrats that were the the slave holders. They were also southern baptist conservatives. Please don’t take my argument as contra republican and pro democrat party. Party affiliations have nothing to do with one being racist or stuck on stupid. But one would be obtuse to suggest that a great amount of support that the republican party receives is from individuals that identify with southern baptist style conservatism.
Whether Hillary or Obama have the same message is irrelevant. What f’ed up Hillary was when Bill called Obama’s candidacy a “fairy tale.” Hillary is losing the AA vote to bad politics. What Bill did would have the same effect as someone calling a Jewish candidacy for mayor of NY a fairy tale, or a Asian candidate for mayor of San Francisco a fairy tale. It’s the reason why McCain now embraces southern baptist conservatives as opposed to dissing them like he did in 2000.
The fact is that Washington doesn’t consistently deliver what the people desire or need. However we go through this dog and pony show every four years and the people make a choice as to who they would rather have lie to them for the next four years. They cast their vote and hope for the best. Some vote along racial lines. Some people vote based upon religion, fear, or special interest considerations. But most folks vote because they like what they hear from one candidate better than the others and AA’s are no different in that respect.
BTW…the government has no constitutional role to provide jobs or cheap gas. However it should provide and support equal opportunity for all people that desire to and work to succeed.
Aye Chihuahua,
The fact is that white southern baptist conservatives NOW overwhelmingly identify with the republican party. White southern baptist conservatives were slave owners, klan members, and supporters of jim crow. The Republican Party works on behalf of issues near and dear to white southern baptist conservatives. That is why AA’s do not support republicans in great numbers. We’re not stupid my friend. Just because you buy a new house doesn’t mean you’ll treat me any better then you treated me in your old house. It just means you have a new house to kick my arse in.
Yonason,
You’re preaching to the choir my friend. I’m well aware of the BS that Jackson, Sharpton. et al, engage in. Regardless of his politics, from what I can surmise from my research, Obama is not from the same mode as those gentlemen. He definitely leans left of center. But not enough to turn me off completely.
To be frank with you – at this point their hasn’t been anyone that really impressed me enough to the point that I would vote for them. IMO McCain is an ass kisser. Hillary thinks she’s entitled to the Presidency. Obama may not be seasoned enough and the other (and third party) candidates are special interest whores. Bob Barr has some appeal. However his speech at the CCC a few years back (and the denial that he didn’t know what they represented) is still stuck in my craw.
If Hillary and Bill had not interjected race into the process then I feel you would have a valid argument. She did not start losing AA support until Bill called Obama’s candidacy a “fairy tale.” And as I stated earlier one can’t pizz off their core constituency and expect them to support you.
I think we’ve covered all of the points here. This will be my last comment on this subject for now. I just hope that I was able to convey some points for your consideration. Let us all agree to disagree if need be. After all, this is America; where we can still disagree without being fearful to do so.
Heru Ammen #33 wrote:
That seems to be offset by comments made like this:
”There is a Jesse Jackson groundswell, and it is becoming everyone’s black, patriotic duty to support him,” said Lawrence Briskar, dean of students at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland.
Again, you are comparing a Democratic primary (Jackson’s numbers) to a general election (Mondale’s numbers as the Democratic candidate), where AA overwhelmingly vote Democratic.
Heru Ammen #23:
It’s not to imply anything of the sort! But to think that race identity hasn’t played a factor is to require a willing suspension of belief.
I believe there are even white voters, suffering from white guilt, who are also being influenced by race. And it’s not to say that race is the trumping factor; it’s not. But it is playing a factor amongst some people. There’s a certain excitement factor in seeing yet another “glass ceiling broken”, as if one were needed as proof-positive that America has moved beyond race. We will never move beyond race, so long as there are men like Reverend Wright who fixate on it, obsess over it, and keep reminding us of our divisions rather than what unites us as one people.
Even celebrating “the first Asian astronaut” or celebrating Tiger Woods not because he is a great golfer, but because he is a great “African(Asian)-American golfer” is to focus on the superficial- skin color. If Asian children need someone who “looks like them” to be “breaking glass ceilings” in the film industry, in sports, in politics, etc, then we are still stuck on race.
Heru Ammen wrote in #45:
Are you sure you’re remembering this correctly?
How did Bill Clinton’s fairy tale comment imply race?
So saying Barak’s Foreign Policy is a “Fairy Tail” is racist. Man that has got to be the most asinine thing I hav ever heard. he was talking about Barak’s Iraqi Policy. Stop listening tothe MSM. Theydo not tell the truth half the time and only start up fights so they can cover it.
And I agree there is a diffefence in Barak and Hillary. At least Hllary has some kind of sense in what is going on in the world. Barak has lived too isolated of a life to comprehend what he says. 57 States, he said he would talk to the Mullahs in Iran, Bomb Pakistan. These are all much more than just gaffes, well all but the 57 states thingie. Do you actually think that talking to the Mullahs in Iraq will get them to stop making Nuclear Bombs. Bomb Pakistan without teling the Govenment of Pakistan is a big no-no, you know they already have Nukes and most of their country hates us to death.
Barak is a scary candidate because he is so naive and will get us into trouble faster than any of the other candidates will. He went to Rev Wright’s hate Whitey and America Church and that does not scareyou??? you think he is just a little left. Is he really a candidate that will bring people together??? Hell, he can not even bring the Democats together, much less the country. He should have wrapped thisup by nowfhe is the candidate that mostDemocratswant. HE has never crossed the aisle to help any Republican in any bill. At least Hillary is pragmatic enough not to go along with every single idea that comes from the DNC headquarters, Barak does. Every vote he has ever made is to the far Left, even farther left than the Socialist in the Senate, and much farther to the Left of Hillary. That is is he even votes for a bill. Mostly he says “present” which is a cop out.
Yes we will have to agree to disagree. There is no way that you can ever tell me that Obama is an ideal candidate. he is so flawed, but the MSM holds the water for him. I just wonder how the Super Duper Delgates will react when his Church gets indicted for illegal contributions, when they find out about what shananigans he has done in Chicago with the other crooks that run the Socialist Republic of Illinois, I should know I live there. Our whole government is run by crooks in both parties from Chicago. There is no way I would ever vote for any politician that comes out of the Chcago Machine. Rezko is nothing compared to what goes on in Chicago.That is just a little teaser, just look at all of our great govenors that are in jail. This is where Obama has come from, and I would never want the rest of the country to recieve that kind of corrupt govenment. You have to know that if he gets elected,he will have to pay off all of his handlers in Chicago off with positions, and pork. That is how Chicago works. Andhe associates himselfwith know terroiststhatblewup bombs on US soil, and Ayers in not at all repentant about it.
Enough of this we are never going to change eachothers minds. And forne thing, I do not believe thatall AA areracist,andI never said such a thing. But to get 92% ofthe AA for an AA candidateisa little much. I knw that in the General Elections they usually go for the Dem about the same percentage,but to say that all AA believe that Obama is the best qualified to be President is ludicrous.
I am just goingto sit back andwatch the Democrat Party destroyi tself because of Identity Politics. you got to hand it to Alanski, he did teach Hillary well,and Obama learned a lot from him also. And it is ironic that they are going after eachothers throats with the same tactics.
stix1972 wrote:
Mata Harley had pointed out that on Obama’s website, he has a category labeled “people”, and what he’s done is divide his supporters up into special interest groups, including doing so along ethnic lines.
I get mixed messages by those who want to look past skin color and see only the content of character, but who think the path to doing so is by anchoring oneself to racial identity, and the promotion of racial interests.
Looking under the category, “African-Americans”:
That’s racial identity politics.
As far as dixiecrats and democrat segregationists migrating over to the Republican Party, Gerard Alexander of the University of Virginia wrote this:
He goes on to point out that the realignment of Southern voters did not begin in the Deep South, but in peripheral states. Eisenhower was not well-supported in the Deep South, but did well with the peripheral states. Nixon was also preferred over Wallace in 1968 by peripheral southern states. Alexander writes:
Republicans also benefited from the immigration of million of midwestern and northeastern voters to the south in the 50’s. They brought two things with them: more enlightened views on race-relations, and their membership in the Republican Party.
Here’s just a partial list of a history of Republican “racism”:
I believe Wayne Perryman has a new book out (“Unfounded Loyalty” is out of print).