CAPITAL SOURCES

Vying for the Black Vote

Will Clinton's Martin Luther King comment cost her black support in the South Carolina primary? A veteran of the civil rights movement weighs in.

By Jeffrey Bartholet | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jan 15, 2008 | Updated: 11:23  a.m. ET Jan 15, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: Colonel Ray @ 01/25/2008 3:49:52 PM

    Comment: Comment:
    In Obama's own words yesterday he said he is not sure if the people who support him now would support Hillary if he (Obama) is not the Democratic Party candidate in November. Obviously he will not. He also said three days ago he would have to check and see how well Bill Clinton could "dance" before he would consider him to be a "brother". Some of my very best lifelong friends are Black, Hispanic, and Muslim. I am very, very concerned that Barrack Obama is a closet racist that will destroy the race relations in this country.

    So I humbly ask that you and all those you know to do your own investigation and report this if true and put an end to this divisive primary campaign before too much damage is done.

    God Bless You.

    Former Host, The All Things Military Show and The Daily Briefing Radio Show, with Colonel Ray,
    heard in Southern California.

    Please read below:
    "We were always playing on the white man's court -- by the white man's rules. If the principal, or the coach, or a teacher wanted to spit in your face, he could, because he had the power and you didn't. The only thing you could choose was withdrawal into a smaller and smaller coil of rage."

    Obama once described the white race as ???that ghostly figure that haunted black dreams.???

    ???That hate hadn't gone away,??? he wrote, blaming ???white people -- some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives.???

    During college, Obama disapproved of what he called other "half-breeds" who gravitated toward whites instead of blacks. And yet after college, he once fell in love with a white woman, only to push her away when he concluded he would have to assimilate into her world, not the other way around. He later married a black woman.

    Obama???s book is primarily about his rejection of his supportive white maternal extended family in favor of his unknown black paternal extended family.

    At age 33, he wrote in "Dreams from My Father, that " he found solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against his mother???s race.

    Obama vowed that he would "never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father???s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I???d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela."

    In his memoir, "Dreams of My Father," Obama writes of a story in Life magazine that influenced him -- about a black man trying to bleach his skin white. No such article could be found in Life or Ebony.

  • Posted By: Julia55 @ 01/24/2008 9:06:17 PM

    Comment: "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Clinton said last week. "It took a president to get it done."

    I understood what Senator Clinton was saying and it makes sense. She was not disputing the amazing amount of work Dr. King did. What she was saying was that had he NOT had a president in office to help him get the laws passed fotr the things we were fighting for, no amount of his work would have ended in the success the Civil Rights movement. Dr. King stood beside President Johnson when he signed that bill. Dr. King and Rev. Abernathy had to meet with the President to get it done. WHAT OTHER PRESIDENT aside from Kennedy were willing to help get these much needed laws passed? It's interesting that those media types and those folks who live for attention are quick to jump on things like this to push a andidate because of his color. The American media feels that it's easier to vilify Hillary Clinton because she happens to be White. Had Obama been a young WHITE man, he wouldn't get anywhere near the press he gets and he knows it. *(See John Edwards -- just as handsome and young and educated, yet he gets nominal press attention). You folks are selling magazines and newspapers and stirring up racial tensions for headlines and to garner talk, and at the end of the day, educated African Americans like myself are going to vote with our heads and not on the emotional rollercoaster you think we ride each day. I'm voting for Senator Clinton and, while I thought it was absolutely beneath her to get into themud with Obama and his tactics just before South Carolina, I know she'll make a better leader. He's not ready, and if he's elected, the first thing that will happen is people like the writers of this piece and all of the media outlets who portray him as today's darling will see him make mistakes based on his inexperience and they will say, "well, he was charming and dynamic and we were all wowed by his erudition and the fact that he spoke well, but boy were we wrong! Boy, if we could be so wrong about this kind of candidate *(and we weren't alone -- YOU voted for him, too, so we're all culpable), NO African American can be suited for the role of President of the United States." And you will set us back 100 years. Hillary gets my vote. And in 8 years after Mr. Obama has spent more time as a Senator and on committees that are relevant to this country.

  • Posted By: democratinillinois @ 01/24/2008 7:36:37 PM

    Comment: This is to you - eddiewhere @ 01/16/2008 10:10:18 PM
    You said "Latino's trust Hillary. There's that likeability factor." I'm Latina. I don't trust Hillary and I don't like her. "Likeability factor? She has been 'told' to be nice. What about that 'crying jag'? Well this Latina didn't get taken in by that...like so many of the New Hampshire women did. I wonder, if she becomes president, will she be that 'evil faced' person? Will she start crying when she doesn't get her way? Crying jags won't work for her as president...there aren't enough women in politics to give in to her way.

  • Posted By: democratinillinois @ 01/24/2008 7:07:11 PM

    Comment: This is to you - yellowdogtarheel. Barack ISN'T running as a 'black' candidate. He is running as a human being. He is wanting to help 'the people' of the United States,even for someone who is as snid remarking as you.

  • Posted By: yellowdogtarheel @ 01/24/2008 5:09:39 PM

    Comment: I think it is entirely appropriate for a black candidate for President to share his perspective about problems that disproportionately impact african-americans. So why does Barack not speak out directly on the issue of the "black experience" in America? Why has he not used his wonderful rhetorical skills to create hope for upward mobility for the african-american underclass? I - like most lifetime democrats - believe that the issue of structural poverty among african-americans is a legitimate topic. It cries out to be addressed as levels of inner city unemployment and multi-generational family breakdown are at epidemic levels. If Barack Obama shared the experience of black america then it would seem natural for him to speak about this issue. The awkward truth is that Barack Obama's background does not reflect the black american experience. Abandoned by his african father at an early age, his upbringing was left primarily to his caucasian feminist iconoclast mother. Then as he approached adolescence his mother sent him to live and be raised by his caucasian grandparents in Hawaii where he attended an elite private school... then to Columbia ... then Harvard Law. So where does Barack get off passing as a "Black American", using black dialect in the neighborhood, suggesting that he shares the experience of average folks - either black, brown or white? Perhaps we democrats are about to get short changed in this deal. Could we be about to elect as our first "black" President someone who has not a clue about how to reach down to the underclass for a hand up?

  • Posted By: Medge @ 01/24/2008 12:33:13 PM

    Comment: nvs9940 should speak for himself, and stop spreading hate about a decent U.S. citizen who is a bonafide senator in U.S. Senate, and happens to be running for president.

  • Posted By: whateverusay @ 01/23/2008 11:43:31 PM

    Comment: I can't believe this site allows the garbage that is Posted (referring to the posting by nv5pp40@01) must be a Hillary supporter. Hey why don't you act like a human being instead of an animal and step out of the mud.

  • Posted By: whateverusay @ 01/23/2008 11:39:47 PM

    Comment: Get a life and stop spending your time spreading lies, your probably part of Hillary's campaign . You and her should be ashamed of yourselves. Hey let's spread some FACTS about Hillary...Her huspand was impeached, and a womanizer who wasn't even MAN enough to tell the truth to the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!! That's why she has her husband campaigning cause Hillary can't stand the HEAT!!!

  • Posted By: Micky Marsh @ 01/21/2008 3:02:02 PM

    Comment: NOTHING PERSONAL AGAINST THE CLINTONS; BUT CAN AMERICA GAMBLE ON HAVING A PRESIDENT THAT WAS IMPEACHED A SECOND TIME IN THE WHITE HOUSE. I SURE WILL BE A PART OF THAT GANG SINGING THE SONG; "SECOND TIME AROUND"

  • Posted By: CEMOR11 @ 01/21/2008 2:00:37 AM

    Comment: Bush -Clinton_Bush_Clinton Naaaa this is America and we do have a choice, we ne to get back to values,apple pie, and respect from countries abroad. America has fallen so low with this regein that there is no saving her with-out change; we have no jobs,no homes, no savings, we have become a debtor nation other countries are buying up america,we need change most of all we need to return back to where this country was one of the most powerful country in all of the world and i don't mean military we had clout that's
    all gone. i'm not bashing this country because it is still the best but as a combat wounded veteran i see the changes, that's causing the misery. we need a new begining something fresh,untainted new ideas,not
    busness as usual no clinton we had enough,the clinton are out for themselves look at the anger listen to the
    venom that's being spokem because someone else has a eye on the same job they are not speaking unity
    Black folks wake and smell the coffee a vote for hillary is another step backward all she wants is your vote. hillary can even relate to you on the same wave length she is above you she is not your equal and will never be oh sure she is right now because she need your vote. after this is over she becomes mrs ritz and she will forget all about the little people who helped her.watch out black-white-little folks. vote your heart ,vote your gut,give chance a chance, this is our new begining this is the dawn of a new day a chage of scenery.

  • Posted By: pmlacy @ 01/20/2008 9:11:17 PM

    Comment: I'm for Obama, but not because he's black. I'm black! I trust his judgment and believe we need someone to bring us together. All this talk about "fighting" for what we want reminds me of the last twenty years of fighting since we've had the Bush-Clinton Dynasty. I tired of all the fighting.

    As for the Muslim issue. I can't understand that one at all. He is not a Muslim and what if he was? There are a billion muslims in this world and if ALL of them wanted to kill us, there would be a lot more of us dead. Being a Muslim doesn't make you a terroris, anymore than being a Christian made Timothy McVeigh a terrorist. Anyway, whatever happened to all this religious freedom that we Americans believe in?

    The school he attended in Indonesia was NOT a muslim school. And what if it was? My great-great grandfather founded and built the Methodist church I attended as a child. My grandmother sent me to Sunday school every Sunday. When I grew up and could think for myselfI became a Buddhist.

    I don't have anything against the Clintons. In fact, I was an FOB (that's "friends of Bill") during impeachment, but that's just it -- that was an awful time in our country's history and I just rather not go back there. Time to MOVE ON!

  • Posted By: nohill61 @ 01/20/2008 9:47:35 AM

    Comment: Let's hope that Bill hurts Hillary's compain more than helps her. These are two disingenuous people whose primary goal is to WIN. Is this what America needs right now? I don't know about you but as a member of the middle class...I don't think Hillary is going to have any benefit for my family...and that is my primary concern. What's best for my kids comes first, and I don't see that happening with Hillary.

  • Posted By: Cotton Candy @ 01/19/2008 11:16:17 PM

    Comment: For anyone to say that Bill Clinton was the first African American President is foolish all they have to do is look a him he is a white male. Yes he seemed to be favorable to Black people on many civil rights issues
    but as soon a black man Barack Obama came on the scene and won the Iwoa primary he went crazy and his anger is showing. Black people need to wake up and smell the coffee. The Clintons want your vote that is all. They want another chance at the white house and Barack is now in the way, and their claws are showing. I can understand if she Hillary wins fair and square but why result to distorting the truth. Dr.King did
    more for civil rights than any other person in the United States he gave his life. However some black leaders who benefited most from what Dr, King died for seem to have forgotton that he died so that young blacks would now be in positon to run for president. Some Black leaders seem to forget that it was people like the young college students in Alabama who endured 100 pound pressure hoses and dog bits to help get us into position that Obama can run for president. I was people like Rosa Parks and Mager Evens who allowed us to climb up on their backs to get us in the position to have the frist black president or a least have a chance to run. Black leaders it was not the Clintons that got you here. I liked the Clintion untill they started Distroting the Truth and now I am ashamed of some our leaders who a buying into this hype. The Clintions have twisted the trurth at every turn. They seem to have no problem starting racial issues and then saying that others are involved. Barack Obama has not said a word about race, and why should he. It would be counter productive. Clinton the first Black President give me a brake, whoever said that is a first class idiot now matter who he or she is.

  • Posted By: swedishsicilian @ 01/19/2008 4:46:54 PM

    Comment: Why are people making this a black vs white issue!? It should be a mulsim background, with a mulslim name, Hussain Obama, issue. Are there communities of muslims supporting him because of his name sake? Are there insurgents funneling him money, because of his name sake? I personally know of several arab people, who do not respect this country, who routinely go back to Lebanon, would prefer to be raising their children there, have property for each of their children to move back to, when they are older, wjho are making sure they become citizens in time, to vote for Obama! Simply because of his muslim related background! It may have nothing to do with the man himself! He may be a practicing Christian, however, if he is perceived by the muslim community as one of them, if he is seen as a possible sympathizer, where will the obligations of putting him into the white house end?> To whom will he, and this country ultimately be indebted to? Why does this not seem to be an issue for the media? Whjy is it kept so quiet, as if politically incorrect to think or say anything negative about his origins, which on some level, have made him who he is today!! WE are all products of our upbringings! None of us can escape who we were as children, what we were taught, and what we were told! It has a long standing impact, and no one, not one person, can sayour past is not related to our present~ He read the Koran, he was taught the prayers, he practiced on his onw, during the prayer hours while away at school! How can he possibly say, none of that impacted who he is~! That in and of itself would be a lie, a phalacy~ and still, no one, brings this issue up~ I would welcome a direct and open dialogue within the media~ I would love to hear the analysts discuss all of this, but they do not~ are you all afraid???? Or, are you waiting until later?? Are you really that angry or against HIllary~

    I would vote for Collin Powell, in a heartbeat, for president, but not Obama! It is not a race issue for me, I wishj people would stop calling it that~ America, as it should be, is afraid of the muslim community, after what we went through on 9/11? Are not any of the media the least bit concerned>> Have those who want him in so badly forgotten what we did go through, and what we all still go through! This nation is becoming overfilled, as are other nations, with the muslim poplulation~ the worst part is, they do not like us, nor do they want to be here, as did the people who came here from the past~

    I would like to see an open dialogue about all of this, the sooner the better~ It is not about black and white, it is about the muslim influence, even if it is slight, it could be all that this coutnry needs to destroy what we have left~! It is not worth that risk, not to me~

  • Posted By: Distant @ 01/18/2008 9:52:41 AM

    Comment: Regardless of what the Clinton's say, Martin Luther King was an incredibly brave man. He inspired both whites and blacks. And without that inspiration, nothing would have changed.

  • Posted By: ajon1600 @ 01/18/2008 8:37:12 AM

    Comment: Like most progressive thinking African Americans I talk to about this, I am trying not to think of Hillary Clinton as a *first) woman or Senator Obama as the frist African American with a real chance to be nominated for the most important job in the world - President of the United States... But as I watch this election unfold I realize that some of the comments I have read about Senator Clinton's polarizing attitude seem to be true.

    The United States (And the world) really needs a leader at this time that can united us, not further isolate us. THe Clintons are developing a pattern of dirty politics... Mr Clinton is developing a pattern of making offensive remarks and then calling black radio shows to "explain" his remark... So he uses the mainstream media to make the remarks for maximum exposure, and then calls the little known radio shows to "explain" his offensive and racially charged comments...

    I think he is of the opinion that African Americans are stupid and "just don't get it".

    I hope our response will be at the polls and after a South Carolina defeat, Senator Clinton will see how he is destroying her chances and send him home to rest.

    We really do want the best candidate to be elected - regardless of race or gender.

  • Posted By: jazzbebop @ 01/17/2008 10:56:09 PM

    Comment: Ya Hillary it took a president, lets see..... 150 years to make a crack on racial equality? As near as I can tell King gave his life - what have you ever given america but gridlock.

  • Posted By: Shannel for Obama @ 01/16/2008 10:43:50 PM

    Comment: I appreciate Bill Clinton as a former president. However, Hillary's cries and defensiveness is questional. Martin Luther King's dream was realized African American by shank's mare and nothing more!

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/16/2008 10:10:18 PM

    Comment: The Latino vote is the x factor. Latino's trust Hillary. There's that likeability factor. I think Hillary is on the right side of the race card. Remember the majority is not the minority yet, so you have to play the numbers. Obama should not fall into the race trap, he ne,eds to concentrate on solidifying the ACLU vote and get Kennedy and Gore on board.

  • Posted By: gdds1 @ 01/16/2008 8:09:24 PM

    Comment: Senator Clinton has historically positioned herself as a politician and only after President Clinton left office did she ride his popularity into the Senate. She has done nothing to show she has more experience than Senator Obama or Former Senator Edwards. I feel as an American neither black or white that she has disgraced this nation with her continious references to her experience when she was not allowed in any important meetings and regardless of her relationship to the President without the proper clearances she could not be told about national security issues and many other inner working of the government. Her experience as a Sentaor has been okay but nothing steller. As the First lady she was nothing more than a figure head and the same can be said of her role as a governor's wife. She played the race card and it blew up in her face, and to make matters worse FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON did the same thing. I also feel her crying was a cheap ploy that weakened her because now she's a crying woman, she showed no emotions when she was First Lady, so how convient she can cry when she's losing a primary. Blace or white , man or woman, Hillary Clinton is not honest enough or valuable enough to be President of the United States

  • Posted By: gdds @ 01/16/2008 8:08:12 PM

    Comment: Senator Clinton has historically positioned herself as a politician and only after President Clinton left office did she ride his popularity into the Senate. She has done nothing to show she has more experience than Senator Obama or Former Senator Edwards. I feel as an American neither black or white that she has disgraced this nation with her continious references to her experience when she was not allowed in any important meetings and regardless of her relationship to the President without the proper clearances she could not be told about national security issues and many other inner working of the government. Her experience as a Sentaor has been okay but nothing steller. As the First lady she was nothing more than a figure head and the same can be said of her role as a governor's wife. She played the race card and it blew up in her face, and to make matters worse FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON did the same thing. I also feel her crying was a cheap ploy that weakened her because now she's a crying woman, she showed no emotions when she was First Lady, so how convient she can cry when she's losing a primary. Blace or white , man or woman, Hillary Clinton is not honest enough or valuable enough to be President of the United States

  • Posted By: lboucher @ 01/16/2008 6:16:49 PM

    Comment: Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen put it, rather indelicately, to the New Yorker, "has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates".

    Team Clinton continues to play Obamas' race as a negative.

    The Clinton campaign must be held accountable for such racist comments! Their allies in the main stream media must not protect this type of negative campaigning and racist behavior.

  • Posted By: lboucher @ 01/16/2008 6:16:09 PM

    Comment: Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen put it, rather indelicately, to the New Yorker, "has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates".

    Team Clinton continues to play Obamas' race as a negative.

    The Clinton campaign must be held accountable for such racist comments! Their allies in the main stream media must not protect this type of negative campaigning and racist behavior.

  • Posted By: nightshadow62 @ 01/16/2008 5:51:50 PM

    Comment: It sounds like this thread has done what politics have done in america, Its wandered from its origional path and has become a debate from points of view that are individuals perception not the question asked..

  • Posted By: luigi837 @ 01/16/2008 12:46:55 PM

    Comment: HILLARY cLINTON ISOT MY CHOICE FOR THE DEMORATIC PRESIDENTAL AS SHE IS SLEAKY LADY AND DON'T REALLY LIKE HER ........... SO, I DON'T LIKE NONE OF THEM AS OF NOW ...

  • Posted By: pbr90 @ 01/16/2008 12:46:36 PM

    Comment: Because as a white majority nation, the majority expects representation of their interests.

    Whether they can expect that from Obama - despite his fancy education and white-oriented oratory - is debatable given his views of gender relations, and the depth of his racial commitment, yet to be examined or tested with any great exposure, though referenced in his book with considerable implication revealed in its title, the audacity of hope. But audacity is a complex word with both positives and negatives whose definition might be examined for clarity in this campaign, and in what many deem his premature run for the Presidency against a favored candidate with considerable more exposure to Presidential matters. In that case, the audacity might be hopeful, but may also be somewhat arrogant and foolhardy in its naivete, issues that have not yet been elevated or examined well in the race.

    Hillary may be running for President but she doesn't have stars in her eyes as some candidates do, and an inflated sense of self importance as some candidates might. Presidential celebrity was meant to be, if at all, on the back side of a Presidency, not on the front side, or the pursuit of happiness that some candidates position it to be, and America needs a gut-check on that reality. America doesn't need saviors, and messiahs; it needs hard workers, even in the Presidency. America doesn't elect kings.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:58:58 PM

      Comment: Hvae to take you to task for this statement: 'Hillary may be running for President but she doesn't have stars in her eyes as some candidates do, and an inflated sense of self importance as some candidates might.' Review how she acted as co-president, and also read how she treated others in the WH. As First Lady, she thought she was Queen.

      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 2:00:42 PM

        Comment: You should not read the Republican warped sense of made up history. About any DEM.

        • Posted By: probson @ 01/17/2008 8:22:18 PM

          Comment: Depp, I have read through quite a few of your postings. You are somewhat lacking in the arena of facts and sound thinking. You tend to cover that up with emotional statements and personal attacks. A little more thought and less emotion would help raise the level of the discussion.

        • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 2:02:41 PM

          Comment: Actually, it was what the Dems said about her that is the most damning...

          • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 4:15:25 PM

            Comment: You have to be kidding me Republican?

            • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 8:59:47 AM

              Comment: No, most of the Dems chidded her for being too one-side, too 'my way or the highway'. They took offense that the first lady was acting as if she were the president. But she did look good, what with that $400 hairdo that she shut down LAX for...

  • Posted By: Bnabia2 @ 01/16/2008 11:09:58 AM

    Comment: Speaking of race issues, I would like to know why it was necessary for CNN to visit an African family in Kenya, a nation in turmoil, the birthplace of Barack Obama's father as if the senator was an immigrant and raised by his father? I believe this action by CNN could very well be construed as a subtle form of racism with intent to instill fear among some voters by highlighting Barack's African roots. Since Senator Obama was raised by his mother and her parents, this action by CNN did not make any sense to me. Also, when Hillary Clinton supporters thought she would lose in New Hampshire, some of Hillary's supporters interview ed on MSNBC stated that she should skip going to South Carolina because 50% of the voters are African American. This is when racism actually entered the democratic process from Hillary's camp. She was totally responsible for bringing race into the election as she has gender, which is very unfortunate.

    Bernistine N. Little of Franklin Park, New Jersey
    bernisti@rci. rutgers.edu

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 12:41:12 PM

      Comment: "You want the black people to teach the Clinton's a lesson?" Why would you say something like that? The Clinton's have been lied about and beaten up in the press for months now. Day after day after day after day Hillary gets lied about and thrown around and you think that is right? For things she never said. You know Obama is being treated with kid gloves now by the media, but soon that will go away. With the media, it always does. And then we will get a chance to see how he comes out the other end after going through the media ringer.

      And CNN is doing background on all the people running for office. That is their job. You don't want to know the background of other people? One of them will sit in the highest office in the world. I wish more people would have known the background of Bush. Then maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we are today. That is why Hillary stayed on the ballot in Michigan. Why did Obama and Edwards take their names off? Both the DEM and t he REP party's have punished states because they moved their primaries forward to compete with Iowa and NH. They took away their delegates . But I heard recently that those delegates may indeed count. Hillary won yesterday and she won those delegates which may indeed still be counted. Why Obama and Edwards didn't give the voters of Michigan a chance for the voices to be heard. I have no idea.

      And Hillary makes the final decision on what states she runs in. Her advisors told her several months ago not to compete in Iowa because Obama was from a neighboring state. Advisors had gone to Iowa in advance and found out that Obama had been recruiting the college kids from Iowa to return back from Ill. on their break to vote. And that is what happened in Iowa. The cards were already highly stacked against Hillary. But she is a strong person who decided the voters in Iowa must make that decision for themselves.. And boy did she pay the price. Hillary was beaten by the pr ess everyday, I would not wish that on my worse enemy.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 11:30:53 AM

      Comment: CNN went to Africa because many in the black community thought Obama wasn't 'black' enough. CNN did it to help Obama, not hurt him. As far as 'racism', does anyone even know what Obama's mother's name is or where she is from, from reading\seeing it in the general media? Why isn't Obama going our of his way to show that he is 'white'? My guess is because Obama thinks he has the 'black' vote locked up (as it would seem by watching the news) and he can 'guilt' white voters to support him in order to remove all of his years of oppressions.

      • Posted By: MissyE @ 01/19/2008 10:43:57 AM

        Comment: That's quite a guess. There is no 'black' vote. When did African Americans become a group with one vote/set of values/economic voice/group of interests/opinion on the issues? Never. Obama has been a breath of fresh air as a candidate who represents the face and interests of the nation. And as a member of this nation, I can find my interests in the platform he supports, not skin color. And I never found that in former candidates whose skin color was similar to mine - no disrespect intended.

      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 12:42:36 PM

        Comment: Hillary Clinton could have done what Guillani is doing and skip Iowa but she did not. Because she knew in order to be a national candidate she had to compete in all 50 states. She is keeping the chance to choose a president in the hands of the voters. Thank god. That is also why she is going to compete in S.C. She may not win, but she sure as heck going to try. She is running on the issues. And the voters want to know what each person is going to do for them, their family, America and the world.

        President Bill Clinton did great things for black communities. You can see for yourself. And Hillary will also do great things. She has already spoken about small business loans with low fixed interest rates, help with child care, health insurance and building up communities.

        Everyone should go see Hillary speak. I have 4 times and she has specific ideas and plans to put them in place after she enters the White House. She is amazing woman. And I would love to be a fly on the wall when Bin Laden hears America has elected its first woman president. Priceless.

        • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:49:59 PM

          Comment: So what you are saying is that Hillary plans on bringing back the welfare state? What she takes double for in taxes, she will gave back to you in a quarter PLUS charge you interest - works for me (sarcasm).

          As far as bin laden, if we elect any Democrate, he will simple smile, knowing he has won, and the Middle East is his for the taking. allah be praised...

          • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 1:12:57 PM

            Comment: A Hillary Clinton and DEM hating Republican in our midst. So nice to see your kind is still around. But you do know your party is circling the drain don't you. So who are you going to vote for?

            And by the way, helping out fellow Americans who need help to get on their feet is not welfare. Or helping out fellow Americans who have been treated like less than nothing by your president Bush is not welfare. Hillary will use the money from Iraq and the filthy rich tax breaks to help her fellow Americans. Not like you republicans who beg the Saudis to lower gas prices. I agree with Hillary, "How pathetic." Americans take the lead they do not follow or beg Saudis for scraps. Sickening.

            • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 1:25:50 PM

              Comment: So let me see if I understand, our current defecit is too high (so says all of the Dems), so instead of lowering it by spending less, Hillary will spend it all (and probably more) by making the Fed government a savings and loan and health insurance provider. And, if her S and L program is successful, and these minorities make a lot of money, she will tax them back to being poor. You see, these filthy rich people that you are talking about are simply poor people who have succeeded. And while you are at it, why don't you look and see how much taxes Hillary's rich Hollywood friends paid over the years...

              • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 2:17:39 PM

                Comment: Are you running fever? You think our deficit is to low? As of today our outstanding public debt is $9,202,642,586,175.21. Does that number not sink into you? And it is all because of your President Bushes war, war, war, war, war! Be sure you thank him for all of us.

                The estimated population of the United States is 304,098,381. So each citizen's share of this debt is $30,262.05. Thank your President Bush for that as well on behalf of all of us.

                The National Debt has continued to increase an average of $1.47 billion per day since September 29, 2006! And thank your President Bush for that!

                So, who are you voting for Republican?

                VOTING REPUBLICAN EQUALS GOING BROKE.

                • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 2:54:38 PM

                  Comment: To quote you "Hillary will use the money from Iraq." Doesn't sound like she will LOWER the deficit, which you have stated is too high. So you support her why? Doesn't sound like change to me...

                  • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 4:38:37 PM

                    Comment: We are spending OVER 6 BILLION DOLLARS A MONTH IN IRAQ. I think we will have a little change left over don't you? And answer me this. Why is that Republicans don't won't to help anyone in America who needs help, but will spend billions and billions on any war and kiss the backside of anyone with oil. Why is that? And what about all the interest that we are paying to borrow all of this money?


                    AND WHAT ABOUT?

                    Almost 4,000 U.S. soldiers killed and more than 60,000 wounded
                    700,000 Iraqis killed and 4 million refugees

                    SINCE YOU WILL NOT SAY. I AM GUESSING YOU WANT TO STAY IN IRAQ FOR ANOTHER 100 YEARS. SO YOUR MAN IS MC CAIN. I CAN SEE WHERE YOU DIDN'T WANT TO ADMIT IT.



                    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 7:32:41 AM

                      Comment: Depp, sorry for the late response to your ranting, but I actually have a life outside of this forum. Republicans are actually the party that believes in 'teaching a person to fish', vs the Dem idea of selling them a fish that someone else has paid for twice over. You see, when you teach a person to EARN what they get, they become self sufficent and appreciate what they have, with the opportunity to make things better via their success. When the government provides handouts, you are only making the person dependent upon the governemnt and they tend to appreciate nothing, and can only rise as high as the government lets them. And as it has been stated ad naseum, it was the Reps and not the Dems who worked to pass the Civil Rights Act, against Dem objection and protest. So who is really out to help people?

                      And in all actuallity, we already have enough programs in place to help people who need it (notice the low unemployment rate?). And its the poor who qualify for governmental health care. So why do we need more programs? Why is it that the Dems cry that the system doesn't work, but instead of fixing or dumping the system, they just continue to pay for the program AND add another similar program that won't work?

              • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 2:03:19 PM

                Comment: Hillarys rich hollywood friends? The last time I heard, Obama had more support in that area then Hillary.

                • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 2:13:15 PM

                  Comment: Don't care about the numbers, just how these liberal dems who suppossedly care so much for the down-trodden choose not to help, insisting instead that the poorer of us do it by force (taxes) for them. Don't you think Clooney, Oprah, Spike, Glover and the like make enough money to end poverty in Amercia? You would think that they would pay enough in taxes, but guess what - they file as corporations, and not as individuals. Don't think that is going to change - that's why they are supporting who they are. And let's not forget the Edwards' of the world, trying to convince everyone that he is the only compassionate millionaire...

                  • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 2:45:10 PM

                    Comment: I guess your not into cracking a book that doesn't have Ann Coulter on the front of it? Or you would understand factual numbers. The American people did fantastic under President Clinton. ( Look it up in a real book if you can tear yourself away from Coulters lies)

                    Americans of all backgrounds benefited tremendously from President Clinton's time in the White House. I know it was the best years for the people I knew back then. All of us made money hand over fists in the stock market. We had secure jobs that paid great, we were not at war, the economy was roaring and times were great. What a great time in American history. And Clinton balanced Americans budget. And Hillary will do the same. Then Bush slipped his way in past the front door and the country went to he!!


                    I wonder who, oh who left our country with a defict before Clinton balanced it? Hum, I wonder. Daddy Bush that is who. Things come around that go around isn't that funny.

                    ARE YOU ASHAMED WHO YOU PICKED TO VOTE FOR? I KNOW IF I HAD LOST MY MIND AND VOTED REPUBLICAN I WOULD BE.

                    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 4:06:09 PM

                      Comment: Clinton didn't balance the budget, he simply over-taxed us more than he and his cronies spent (hence their 'surplus').

                      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 4:41:28 PM

                        Comment: More of Bushes fuzzy math. So, very, very sad Republican.

                        • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 9:06:04 AM

                          Comment: So how did billary and algore end up with a 'surplus'?

                    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 3:17:41 PM

                      Comment: Read basic economics - econmy goes in 18 month cycles. The economy that Clinton had was based upon what Bush, Sr started, and Clinton didn't touch (even by his own advisor's accounts). As far as things being better, the Savings and Loan debacle was under Clinton; Enron, Tyco, etc. was under Clinton; The first World Trade Center bombing, the USS Cole bombing, the attack on Marine barracks was under Clinton, and the Clinton's let bin laden walk. And Hillary promises more of the same...

                      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 5:02:54 PM

                        Comment: There are people sitting in jail for life for the WTC bombing. And they get to enjoy everything American, every single day. That must really, really piss them off.

                        No person on the face of this earth is able to control every horrible thing that happens. But President Clinton didn't invade Iraq and kill hundreds of thousands because their leader attempted once to kill his daddy. And all that oil didn't hurt either.

                        And trying to give daddy Bush credit for something he never, ever did is oh to Republican of you. And the other things you spoke of, the CEO"s were friends of the Bushes. And trying to change history again oh so republican of you.

                        And Bin Laden was never allowed to escape. President Clinton tried like hell to kill Bin Laden. Unlike Bush. His dead of alive statement has really come back to bite him on the backside.

                        I have to go to work now. Think about voting for the DEMS. Were a big tent party. There is room for everyone. Even you.

                        • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 7:40:20 AM

                          Comment: First, the Clinton's 'policy' on bin lauden was that we could not 'legally' seize him, and so when he was offered to us (listen to the tape and read the transcript of the meeting), the Clinton's said to turn him lose. Instead, Clinton ordered the bombings of an aspirin and a baby formula factor, neither of which contained bin lauden. You are right, clinton did not invade Iraq when hussien was committing genocide on the Kurds, or raping, torturing and killing hundreds of thousands of his own people. And you are right, Clinton did not invade Iraq, or anywhere in the middle east when they were harboring and training terrorists who were killing US military and Civilian personnel. It does seem he opened your big tent up to everyone. Makes me want to feel safe and secure and vote Dem...

                  • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 2:20:45 PM

                    Comment: I think if Clooney, Oprah, Spike and Glover gave over all their money it would make a great dent in Americas poverty. So, when are you going to go over and ask them to give it up?

                    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 3:18:48 PM

                      Comment: They're Billary and Obama's friends, not mine. Shouldn't they be asking?

                      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 5:11:29 PM

                        Comment: I am sure your republican get it done attudite would be much more effective . Maybe you can hold them by their feet until their wallets fall out. Then you can leap over the needy Americans and swim over to Iraq. I am sure they could use it so much more.

                        • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 7:44:28 AM

                          Comment: 'Maybe you can hold them by their feet until their wallets fall out.' Isn't that Hillary's new tax plan for the middle class? It seems from your attitude, you feel that the 'rich' people that you like (hollywood types) shouldn't pay taxes (though they make enough to solve all of your 'problems'), but these 'filthy rich' others should pay it all. That doesn't sound like the Dems want to treat everyone equally, does it? Looks like that big tent is getting a little smaller...

      • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:33:08 PM

        Comment: Why is there a need for Obama to have to show that he is white? Because white consider themselves supreme and in order to Obama to be accepted there is a need to him to show off his whiteness? I don't think so...Obama a black man and this was determined by Plessy vs. Ferguson (not that you may know about this legislation), in which the white powers that be voted into law that any person with 1/16th blood in considered BLACK. So, therefore, regardlless of Obama white mother (who is deceased from Ovarian cancer in 1995, bless her sould), OBAMA IS A BLACK MAN.

        • Posted By: paulte @ 01/16/2008 1:10:56 PM

          Comment: I think the fraction was 1/8 for a person to be considered black. Only 1/16 black blood meant the person was classified as white. That was the way they did it in LA anyway. I think those laws are a bit dated! Obama is a person of mixed race, neither white nor black really. I believe the last census had a category for mixed race.

        • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:37:54 PM

          Comment: Doesn't he have the RIGHT in America to be either? His choice to play up one and down-play the other is purely political.

  • Posted By: ledrwtie @ 01/16/2008 10:56:36 AM

    Comment: what i want black people to know that bill clinton is saying that we as blacks are stupid, when his said barack run for whitehouse is a bunch of balony.I want black people to teach the clinton's a lesson.

  • Posted By: paulte @ 01/16/2008 10:51:34 AM

    Comment: I'm no Hillary fan but I think she is getting a bum rap on this one. She stated the obvious. The aspirations of the blacks during the civil rights era were actualized, in the legal sense at least, only when white legislators voted to change the law. The same is true of South Africa when in the last whites only vote, 70% of the white electorated voted to end Apartheid.

    • Posted By: AlexD @ 01/16/2008 11:25:39 AM

      Comment: But you must remeber if it werent for those black civil rights leaders and those againt apartheid who were African in South Africa, Those white politicians and presidents would have NEVER passed any lasw for these racial injustices to end. Only did black politicians, civil rights leaders and so forth became tired of being mistreated based on color that these white men of power decided to do something. It would have not been done had it not been protested.

      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 12:45:45 PM

        Comment: You can't compare what happened in South Africa to America. The blacks were the majority in South Africa, not the whites. In America it was totally opposite.

        • Posted By: paulte @ 01/16/2008 2:40:08 PM

          Comment: In America the whites had the numbers, the wealth and most of the political power. In South Africa, the blacks had the numbers while the whites had the wealth, 87% 0f the land, the guns and all the political power. Numbers don't mean much when the minority is holding all the other cards in the deck!

      • Posted By: paulte @ 01/16/2008 12:18:45 PM

        Comment: Clearly the civil rights protests were a factor in the civil rights legislation that was eventually passed. In America many white people, perhaps a majority, wanted to see an end to segregation. The situation in South Africa was different. The whole world was against the white regime. The whites had all the guns and could have wiped out a signifcant portion of the black population in any insurrection. The world would have not come to the aid of South African blacks.

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:09:47 PM

        Comment: Apartheid ended in in S.Africa because of economic sanctions placed upon it by the rest of the world. It was deKlerk that 'eneded' aparthied in 1991, not Mandella. Apartheid was lifted BEFORE Mandella could be elected in 1994, and not because he was elected.

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 11:52:23 AM

        Comment: Actually, if it wasn't for all of the white solders dieing in the civil war and Lincoln (a Republican) signing the Imancipation Proclimation, the black politicians would never have been elected by the majority of white voters. Following all of this, if the Republican politicians hadn't pushed the Civil Rights legislation past the segregationist Democrats, Johnson would have had nothing to sign.

        • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 12:58:21 PM

          Comment: The Republican politicians pushed nothing thru. It was President Johnson who armed twisted enough DEMS and REPS to vote for his bill. In the name of President John Kennedy. But in some minds that was not enough. They would not budge. It took President Johnson with his influence on the hill to get it done. I can't believe how many people want to deny the facts. Read history.

        • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:36:42 PM

          Comment: LBJ didn't have to sign anything, he could have vetoed the legislation....so lets not try to hype up the Republicans because all the Republicans did was introduce legislation based on the suffering of Black Leaders and black people in general. They did not come up with any of the contents on there own. It was easy for them to develop the legislation because many of them were part of the problem that they were pretending to fix.

          • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:55:28 PM

            Comment: And the Democrats did what? Fight AGAINST the legislation. Contrary to what you might think, many of the Republicans, as Lincoln did, felt it was their RELIGIOUS duty to end segregation, and so they acted because they believed it was the right thing to do, and not becuase a minority of the population was pressuring them to do so. You see, when you are in power and you write the laws, your really don't have to do what anyone else says. And so, you do alot of things because it is right and time to change. This was also deKlerk's feelings.

            • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 1:56:36 PM

              Comment: I was born and raised in the south. During my 30 years there as a white person I saw many things. And if enough white people did not come around to the plights of blacks, that legis. never would have passed. The whites were the only ones in power to pass laws. And the politicians knew if not enough whites stood behind them on this issue, they would be voted out of office.

              And a religious duty? You have to be kidding. Most of them owned slaves. Give me a break! Where was their religious duty then?

              The northerns had various reasons for freeing the slaves. And mostly all were sef serving. When have you ever heard of a selfless politician? Never thats when.

              • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 2:05:07 PM

                Comment: Slave owners in the 1960's! How did they ever getting elected into office!!

                • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 2:54:42 PM

                  Comment: You really need to put that Coulter book down. During Lincolns days before the slaves were free. The people who you are referring to for their religious reasons owned slaves. Understand now. And they wanted the slaves freed for their own reasons, not anything else.

                  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 3:47:02 PM

                    Comment: As a Dem, you are used to taking things out of context. The discussion was about how REPUBLICAN'S effected change during the Civil Rights era, and the Dems OPPOSSED it. The reference was to how these legislators in the 1960s, LIKE Lincoln did during his time, felt it was a religious duty to treat all people as equals, and those to end segregation. In other words, connecting religion with ones actions is not always a bad thing.

                    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 5:34:43 PM

                      Comment: The one thing the DEMS do best is see right thru all the dung the REP are always throwing our way. You REP are the ones that live in Disney World. And oh my god do you guys take things out of context. There is never a all or nothing in politics. Not all REP support everything and not all DEMS support everything. Trying to give Republicans credit for something they never did, is like I said earlier so REP of you. Sorry Charlie.

                      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 9:04:39 AM

                        Comment: Actually, you seem to just be using a lot of words to say nothing. You offer up a paragraph worth of words that added nothing but a half-hearted attack, but nothing of value to the discussion. Sounds like a dem campaign speech...

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/16/2008 10:48:56 AM

    Comment: LEt me get this straight. Saudi Arabia owns thirteen per cent of our U.S. economy. The Jews recieve Billions of dollars in subsidies from the UNITED STATES. IS IT NOT IN BOTH FACTIONS INTEREST TO KEEp THE SATUS QUO. BOTH THE ARABS AND THE ISRAELI's ARE ENJOYING OUR TAX MONEY. THEY MADE US CUT WELFARE BUT K Ept their subsidies intact. THIS IS WHY LIBERMAN AND McCain CAN NEVER WIN. THE ESTABLISHMENT HAS HAD IT. EVERY SECRET SOCIETY IS BEHIND ROMMNEY. Michigan is desperate and everyone knows that ROMMNEY bought his victory.

  • Posted By: Mary Jane @ 01/16/2008 10:45:00 AM

    Comment: If Mr. Sellers was organizing sit-ins in 1960, he had to have been around 15 years old. Today everyone c laims they were on the civil rights movements even though they are just not old enough to even understand what it was all about. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this age thing.

  • Posted By: Mary Jane @ 01/16/2008 10:40:07 AM

    Comment: If Sellers organized sit-ins in 1960 he had to have been around 15 years old. No offense. Just what I figure timing was in that period. it seems everyone was on the band wagon organizing sit-ins. As I recall history of this period, they started around mid-60's. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/16/2008 10:39:52 AM

    Comment: We need oil. We need to profit of oil. So how can we intelligently tap into oil revenues without having the oil companies raise the price. The billions of dollars in profit that they make must be used to pay our debts and balance the budget. We are getting ripped off and this OIL monopoly must be broken up. Any president that can do that and not have these maniacs raise the price to over a hundred dollars a barrel, would truly be amazing. Oil compainis operating in foreign countries must be taxed according to their profits. They must be transparent so everyone can witness that they can pay tax and still make a healthy profit. Cracking Oil, the Drug compainies and the insurance companies would put us back on track.. This task is next to impossible and only a movement can reform these entities.

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 11:10:14 AM

      Comment: You want to balance the budget - abolish the IRS and eliminate taxes. Then, all the government can spend is what they take in in tariffs.

  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 9:14:52 AM

    Comment: First off, Hillary was correct (one of the few times) with her comment that it took a legislator (Johnson) to pass Civil Rights legislation. Citizens, no matter how vocal or prominant, cannot do that. The interviewee, however, slipped into a racists statement himself, by only noting the Blacks who were active in the Civil Rights Movement, and neglecting the countless Whites who risked their lives in the process (and actually passed the legislation (Republicans) that Johnson signed.

    As far as race and gender being injected into the process, both candidates and the media have played off of this since Clinton and Obama first announced. In fact, both candidates are betting on their race and gender for votes. Billary is counting on votes BECAUSE she is supposedly a female, and Obama is counting on votes BECAUSE he is black (thought the subject of wether he is 'black enough' is still being debated within the black community).

    However, isn't it really sexist to vote for Hillary BECAUSE she wears a skirt, as well as racists to vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black? In both instances, you are NOT voting for the other candidates because they are neither, which is discrimination by any other name...

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/16/2008 3:02:06 AM

    Comment: Tensions are high between Latinos and blacks. Likeability, Latino's trust Hillary. However, candidates are scared of the immigration issue. The media has been embarassed, their polls have proven to be wrong time and time again. WHY. intrusion of privacy.. pollsters and the media are not trusted because they represent corporate interestets. NOT the peoples. It is funny how NFL SUNDAY looks the same as CNN election commentary shows. WOW. NEwsweek free speech is something that the intelligent british cannot stop and niether can you.

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:01:53 PM

      Comment: The only way illegal immigration will ever be seriously dealt with is to give the vote to the American people. Every state should vote on their own on this issue. A few states already have. The people who live in each community should decide, not any politician.

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 7:47:23 AM

        Comment: Isn't it the responsibility of the Federal governemnt to protect the borders of the United States? And isn't it the responsibility of the Federal Governemnt to determine who qualifies for United States Citizenship?

  • Posted By: RG123 @ 01/16/2008 2:27:13 AM

    Comment: What Hillary said is right. The civil rights movement has given tremendous credit to MLK but Lyndon Johnson was never spoken in the same breadth eventhough in my humble opinion his contribution is no less than MLK. Hillary's comments and intention, I believe, is not to belittle MLK, undeniably a great man, but to give proper due to Johnson, an unsung civil rights hero who was diminished by the problem of his time and circumstances. The whole episode seems to be distorted and manupilated by those with with vested interested. If we read between the line, the presence of an unseen hand is obvious.

  • Posted By: JoeMama2 @ 01/15/2008 11:41:47 PM

    Comment: Hillary's comment came across to me a white male who is not particularly race sensitive as a poor choice of words. It seemed to diminish the accomplishments of Dr. King, and glorify a power for the presidency that the position does not truly have... I do not trust Hillary, I think she is power consumed and not authentic, I had at least liked the char