Vying for the Black Vote

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

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

    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

      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: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 11:52:23 AM

        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: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:36:42 PM

          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

            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

              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

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

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

                  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

                    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

                      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

                        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: Depp @ 01/16/2008 12:58:21 PM

          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: Depp @ 01/16/2008 12:45:45 PM

        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

          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

        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

        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: observer171 @ 01/15/2008 5:32:01 PM

    I think the point Hillary Clinton was making was that at the time of Lyndon Johnson the efforts of Martin Luther King and others in support of the civil rights movement might have gone to waste had it not been for the strength and commitment of Lyndon Johnson who was well known as someone who could work both sides of the legislature. I also think that voting based on race or national origin is something to be avoided in all events.

    • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/15/2008 7:45:00 PM

      If it were not for the Martin Luther King and other, LBJ would not have had any legislative to work with, and I am sure his intentions were not just for the purpose of helping black people.

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 9:31:48 AM

        Those 'others' would be Republicans who actually wrote the Civil Rights Act, and not the Dems who fought against it. And Dr. Kings dream was for ALL people to be free, not just blacks. And why do you think no one talks about the thousands of white citizens who march with Dr King, who registered Blacks to vote, and who risked their lives for the civil rights movement..?

        • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:18:41 PM

          I guess no one counts those white citizens because the minimal amount of lives lost and families destroyed hold no comparision to those of African Americans/Blacks. Yes, we do appreciate those white citizens who were brave enough to assist in the effort, however, these white citizens did not have to deal with any of the ongoing racial issues.

          • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:43:28 PM

            No one counts them because of the color of their skin (white). And since many were Jewish, well, we all know how many Black -activist groups feel about Jewish people...

            • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 5:27:38 PM

              No, we don't know how blacks feel about Jewish groups, since you seem to know so much about blacks... you tell me...

              • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/17/2008 7:51:31 AM

                Read Malcolm X and Louis Faracan, for starters...

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

    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

      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

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

    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

    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

    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

    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

    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

    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

    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: bruce350 @ 01/15/2008 4:29:50 PM

    Is it just me, or is the media stupid? I guess you can twist any remark if you twist hard enough. Hillary's comment was correct. MLK's dream was realized when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. LBJ just happened to be the President at the time. Reaching that point in history took blood, sweat, tears, and lives to accomplish. It all began when he said, "I have a dream". It was MLK's determination, persistence, and communication that helped a nation to better itself by influencing legislators in Washington to draft the Civil Rights Act. Hillary Clinton merely condensed into one sentence what I have taken several to say. She has done no wrong by saying so.

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 5:41:52 PM

      Your right. The media is stupid!

  • Posted By: francisco_30 @ 01/15/2008 4:20:29 PM

    Newsweek seems to hate Hillary Clinton, all this media fuss about something so stupid just becuase clinton is a woman. There are other stories Newsweek should be covering and not destroying a career for a woman who has given 35 yrs to this beloved country.

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 5:36:50 PM

      Amen to that!

    • Posted By: zanniban15 @ 01/15/2008 5:09:05 PM

      Hillary has given 35 years of what!! She was the wife of a Governor and the wife of a President. She has not acomplished anything. She and her supporters really need to stop circulating this lie. I'm a democrated and I do support Sen. Obama. If Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, I wil either vote for a republican or I will write Sen. Obama in. She is a fraud in the biggest sense of the word. She has given 35 years of BS.

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 9:19:31 AM

        And Obama has done what? He got electedd by unsealing another candidates private divorce papers and then talked about ethics? He bought his house for one-third of the asking price because a mobster's wife bought the adjacent lot for full price, all the while he talks about ethics. He has a healthcare industry lobbyist on his payrole, and yet all the while talks reform. His answer for all of this - the rules don't apply to him. Obama has been in presidential campaign mode since entering the Senate - so how much Senatorial experience does HE really have.

        Hillary and Obama or just one and the same...

      • Posted By: massivecardiac @ 01/15/2008 8:48:34 PM

        right on lefty!!!!

      • Posted By: massivecardiac @ 01/15/2008 8:47:39 PM

        ditto

  • Posted By: bruce350 @ 01/15/2008 4:34:43 PM

    Is it just me or is the media stupid? Hillary Clinton's comment had absolutely no bias in it whatsoever. MLK's vision WAS realized when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. LBJ just happened to be the President at the time. The signing of the Civil Rights Act was the culmination of much time, blood, sweat, tears and lives. It was Dr. King's vision, persistance, and communication that influenced a nation to have landmark legislation like the Civil Rights Act drafted. Talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill!

    • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/15/2008 7:52:21 PM

      I didn't see why Hillary felt a need reaffirm that the President is the ultimate decisionmaker. We all know that, so what was her purpose?

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 9:24:22 AM

        Interesting how Hillary left out the most important piece of history - Johnson would have had nothing to sign had not the Republicans first written the Civil Rights Act legislation, that many Democrats were against. Interesting how both candidates, Obama and Hillary, are spinning history to serve their purpose (towards Dems and toward Blacks).

        • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:24:52 PM

          There was a Democratic president if office, so it really didn't matter what the Republicans and/or Democrats did or did not do because the President could have vetoed the legislation anyway.

          • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 1:03:27 PM

            But did the Dem Pres, knowing he was going to support the Act, have a Dem write the Act? Guess he couldn't find a Dem with a pen...

            • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 5:29:08 PM

              it didn't matter who wrote the legislation, the fact is the democratic president had the right to veto

  • Posted By: Joyous1 @ 01/15/2008 4:59:36 PM

    Hillary Clinton???s point was quite clear. In trying to minimize Barack???s appeal to people in general, she used MLK as an example to underscore her point that rhetoric alone is not enough to bring about change.

    What Dr. King did by vocalizing a call for change cannot be negated, however, because it brought about the groundswell that we all are beneficiaries of. I suppose in Hillary???s mind those letters from a Birmingham jail were just an aside because the real work had to be done by someone else. That is why people are angry with her because it seems winning at any cost is what is most important to her and that means everything and everyone is fair game.

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 4:05:24 PM

      I will tell you what allot people have been saying. Obama is no MLK. MLK was a great man who accomplished enormous things for African American people. He stood up against all odds and enormous entrenched hatred against him and his cause. And he did it peacefully. And for that he was beaten in the streets and buildings, arrested numerous times and fire hoses turned on him. And God knows what other horrible things he had to endure. Does that sound like Obama to you? That is what Hillary and allot of people have been saying. MLK is greatly admired by millions and millions of people around the world.

      I greatly admired President Kennedy but I have never compared myself to him. I have never spoken like him in sermon after sermon after sermon. ( And they are sermons where he uses a southern accent at certain points in his speech. I went to one in NH and I thought I got lost and went to church) We love our heroes but at the end of the day, it's just us. Obama would be in the white house, not MLK. The American people must know specific things he will do for America. What does Obama plan to do on the tremendous issues facing our time?

      Hillary and Edwards have been answering numerous peoples questions at their rallys. And the ones I have see Hillary at, she answers questions for hours. At every single event I attended, she answered questions from everything from troop pull out, to the impending recession, to jobs, health care and even foster care.

      MLK and JFK were great men. But they were only great because they worked hard and thru trials and tribulations succeeded. And often with tremendous failures. But that is how they grew into great men. And they are still loved today after how many decades after their deaths.

      Hillary or Bill never said any racial slur. They are good people. The media isn't, but they are.

  • Posted By: olebergen @ 01/15/2008 5:29:14 PM

    this is more of the same Clinton muscle flexing. Surrogates out there speaking poison for them and then saying 'oh, i didn't mean that'. Then they say what? we just want to play nice. Lame.

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:55:34 PM

      Making things up that Bill and Hillary Clinton said is not going to help Obama get elected.
      Or taking someones innocent words and turning them into racial slurs to serve their own purpose. That is racist.

      And turning innocent words into a attack is the Rove play book.

  • Posted By: obamafriend @ 01/15/2008 6:01:43 PM

    It is very clear that both the clintons were desperate and lashed out at Senator Obama knowing fully well that words do matter(who knows better than them) and created the controversy to get the white votes in NH, and now that she won the primaries there she is skillfully trying to put the blame on obama and smearing his campaign.Ofcourse it is going to hurt the african american sentiments especially the civil rights movement is very close to their hearts as so many of the eir lives were sacrificed for the cause and mlk's contribution to it trivialized in such a way is derogatory . Instead of skirting around and playing with words again by denying what she meant Hillary should be once be honest and apologise publicly for it and ask to be forgiven. That's what a true lead does by showing humility and grace what Senator Obama has done when he ackowledge his teen misgivings in his book. That definitely brings out the contrast between these two candidates.

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:50:01 PM

      "Created the controversy to get the white votes in NH?" First of all, the media is showing a few seconds of the clips and lying about the Clinton's. You can't believe everything you see on tv. And second, this controversy started after NH, not before. Funny how that happened. She wins NH and all of sudden race is injected into the process. Who has the most to gain?

  • Posted By: fun2blog @ 01/15/2008 6:35:24 PM

    Oh c'mon people! A person can make an argument out of anything. For example, if I said I like Oranges you could say yeah well Oranges are grown in the south and they had slavery in the south so you must like slavery. Anybody can do it, its not really that hard. And if black people want to vote for someone because they are black that is truly sad. Would they vote for Hitler if he was black, just because he was black. NO! Why? Because they know his agenda. Well, maybe you should take time to actually know what the candidates are saying instead of what mud the others want to throw at them. I am an independent, I vote for whom I think will do the best job. And the last thing I consider is the maelstrom of backstabbing rhetoric that flows from opponents. I implore the American people, white, black, repub, demo, atheist, or Christian, please research all the candidates, make your decision at home, and in your heart. Our country is deep in the "hurt locker" please don't let skin color, "color" your vote.

    • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/15/2008 7:46:59 PM

      How do you know black people are voting for someone just because they are black.....Any way if they are, so what!.....Have you ever heard the statement "I'm Black and I'm Proud!"

      • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 9:43:39 AM

        If you vote for someone BECAUSE of the color of their skin, and thus AGAINST someone because they don't share that same pigment, you are being a racists. And isn't racism wrong?

        • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:14:39 PM

          I wouldn't consider this racism if you vote for someone of our ethnicity, I call it having faith in those who look like you!

          • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 12:21:47 PM

            So if a white person only votes for white people, and thus against black people, they aren't being racist, just 'ethnic'? What about 'supporting your race' by passing legislation against the other races and in favor of your own? Is that just 'supporting the faith'?

            • Posted By: MissD14 @ 01/16/2008 12:39:03 PM

              White people have always voted for their own, thats why they are in power, so I would say they know all about ethics....why do you think there was segretation? How do you pass legislation without a white controlled government...give me a break! Get real!

              • Posted By: dewcooper @ 01/16/2008 1:00:48 PM

                My point is, when whites only elected whites, it was called racism. But when blacks elect blacks, it is called 'keeping the faith'. Notice the hypocracy?

                • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:41:00 PM

                  Because whites don't vote for whites becasue their white. In just the same way I didn't think Ted Bundy was innocent just because he was white. I listened to the facts. I wasn't looking at skin color.

      • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:38:12 PM

        WE ARE AT WAR. You don't let someone try to be president. You are either presidential material or you are not. And I just don't see Obama having it. No experience and less than a few years in the Senate before he left and started running for President. Why kind of judgment does that show at a time of war? He could not even complete a full term as senator. Why not? He doesn't need the experience? The fact that Obama thinks that he is the most qualified to lead the most important position in the world shows show to me he is not really thinking.

        I would never run with such little experience. My hero President Kennedy served as a Congressman from 1947 thru 1953 and was elected to the Senate and served from 1953 thru 1961.

        Soldiers are right now putting their lives on the line and blood is being shed on foreign soil. What is his exact plan for getting us out of there without creating a vacuum where another Hussein takes power. And what if there is another 9.11? What is his specific plan for protecting the homeland. I have heard nothing.

        When Bush ran in 2000 I felt the same way I do now. He ran as the Washington outsider who could bring people together. Al Gore who was had several decades of experience doing great things for America was ignored by the media. There is a fresh face in town. Give me a break. Look where that got us.
        And who here does not believe that Al Gore would not have made a much better President ten fold over Bush? Vote with your head, not heart.

        Hillary will start bringing our troops home within 90 days after taking office. She will do it at a pace not to leave a vacuum in Iraq. She will protect our soldiers as they drive through those dangerous roads in Iraq on their way home by tough action, not just words.

  • Posted By: ikie12pts @ 01/15/2008 8:55:37 PM

    I have always liked Hillary, but she needs to back off this "divisiveness", NOW. WE want to win this election not alienate voters. Good grief!!!!

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:11:43 PM

      That would be the media. If they would not have these lies on hour after hour would anyone here know about it?

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

    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 charisma of her husband, if not all of his character. I do not feel the Obama camp had anything to do with this, Hillary spoke the words, and it imediately struck me when I heard it a a foot in mouth moment that would have repercussions...

    • Posted By: Depp @ 01/16/2008 3:08:08 PM

      It came across to me as a white woman that Hillary was speaking the truth. ( Listen to the entire comment, not just a slice of what the media wants you to hear.) President Johnson is finally getting the credit he so richly deserves on this. Everyone who was involved should get credit. The truth is the truth.

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

    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 ...

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse