ELECTION 2008  
The New York Times / By Bob Herbert
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 388

Hillary's Grotesque Insult to African-Americans

It's one thing to lack class, but it's quite another to deliberately try and wreck the presidential prospects of your party's likely nominee.
May 12, 2008  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Election 2008 headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 
The Clintons have never understood how to exit the stage gracefully.

Their repertoire has always been deficient in grace and class. So there was Hillary Clinton cold-bloodedly asserting to USA Today that she was the candidate favored by "hard-working Americans, white Americans," and that her opponent, Barack Obama, the black candidate, just can't cut it with that crowd.

"There's a pattern emerging here," said Mrs. Clinton.

There is, indeed. There was a name for it when the Republicans were using that kind of lousy rhetoric to good effect: it was called the Southern strategy, although it was hardly limited to the South. Now the Clintons, in their desperation to find some way -- any way -- back to the White House, have leapt aboard that sorry train.

He can't win! Don't you understand? He's black! He's black!

The Clintons have been trying to embed that gruesomely destructive message in the brains of white voters and superdelegates for the longest time. It's a grotesque insult to African-Americans, who have given so much support to both Bill and Hillary over the years.

(Representative Charles Rangel of New York, who is black and has been an absolutely unwavering supporter of Senator Clinton's White House quest, told The Daily News: "I can't believe Senator Clinton would say anything that dumb.")

But it's an insult to white voters as well, including white working-class voters. It's true that there are some whites who will not vote for a black candidate under any circumstance. But the United States is in a much better place now than it was when people like Richard Nixon, George Wallace and many others could make political hay by appealing to the very worst in people, using the kind of poisonous rhetoric that Senator Clinton is using now.

I don't know if Senator Obama can win the White House. No one knows. But to deliberately convey the idea that most white people -- or most working-class white people -- are unwilling to give an African-American candidate a fair hearing in a presidential election is a slur against whites.

The last time the Clintons had to make a big exit was at the end of Bill Clinton's second term as president -- and they made a complete and utter hash of that historic moment. Having survived the Monica Lewinsky ordeal, you might have thought the Clintons would be on their best behavior.

Instead, a huge scandal erupted when it became known that Mrs. Clinton's brothers, Tony and Hugh Rodham, had lobbied the president on behalf of criminals who then received presidential pardons or a sentence commutation from Mr. Clinton.

Tony Rodham helped get a pardon for a Tennessee couple that had hired him as a consultant and paid or loaned him hundreds of thousands of dollars. Over the protests of the Justice Department, President Clinton pardoned the couple, Edgar Allen Gregory Jr. and his wife, Vonna Jo, who had been convicted of bank fraud in Alabama.

Hugh Rodham was paid $400,000 to lobby for a pardon of Almon Glenn Braswell, who had been convicted of mail fraud and perjury, and for the release from prison of Carlos Vignali, a drug trafficker who was convicted and imprisoned for conspiring to sell 800 pounds of cocaine. Sure enough, in his last hours in office (when he issued a blizzard of pardons, many of them controversial), President Clinton agreed to the pardon for Braswell and the sentence commutation for Vignali.

Hugh Rodham reportedly returned the money after the scandal became public and was an enormous political liability for the Clintons.

Both Clintons professed to be ignorant of anything improper or untoward regarding the pardons. Once, when asked specifically if she had talked with a deputy White House counsel about pardons, Mrs. Clinton said: "People would hand me envelopes. I would just pass them on. You know, I would not have any reason to look into them."

It wasn't just the pardons that sullied the Clintons' exit from the White House. They took furniture and rugs from the White House collection that had to be returned. And they received $86,000 in gifts during the president's last year in office, including clothing (a pantsuit, a leather jacket), flatware, carpeting, and so on. In response to the outcry over that, they decided to repay the value of the gifts.

So class is not a Clinton forte.

But it's one thing to lack class and a sense of grace, quite another to deliberately try and wreck the presidential prospects of your party's likely nominee -- and to do it in a way that has the potential to undermine the substantial racial progress that has been made in this country over many years.

The Clintons should be ashamed of themselves. But they long ago proved to the world that they have no shame.

© 2008 The New York Times

AlterNet is making this New York Times material available in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Election 2008 headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: racism, hillary clinton

comments COMMENTS ( 388 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
 

Comments are closed-

With Friends like these
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fratricide08 on May 12, 2008 2:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...who needs republicans. She was talking about a demographic and once again the quote is sliced and diced to make it look like race-baiting. I'm starting to wonder if the media and some Obama "supporters" are really just trying to sabotage his campaign. Painting the Clintons as racists and now as Mr. Herbert says, classless and graceless too are unforgivable sins. Wanna know why, Clinton supporters say no to Obama? One of the MAJOR reasons is this drivel.

What's more the author has apparently still not figured out the problem. Look at the exit polls and you'll see what the 90% AA vote is obscuring -- the party is divided by CLASS in EVERY CATEGORY -- white, asian, latino, gay, straight etc. Obama is the candidate of the rich/upper middle class whereas Clinton has the votes of the non-rich even when you adjust for race **and** education. AAs obscure this reality because they are almost unified in their support and we as a nation still see in terms of only black and white people.

Further, it does Clinton NO GOOD to race-bait and you have to have a special kind of hate in your heart, and to have taken a few bumps on your head, to believe it in the first place. The demographics have been clear throughout the race and haven't moved in ANY significant amount the entire campaign season. Obama's problem is a class based problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Frank J. Burris
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Moira61
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: mkdelta69
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Lauren
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: texshelters
» Tex! A warning Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Tex! A warning Posted by: beachpoet
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: mkdelta69
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: captain sassy
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: fratricide08
» Uh..excuse me Posted by: Moira61
» RE: Uh..excuse me Posted by: blackie4aces
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Quannah
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Lauren
» Do not apologize. Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Do not apologize. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Do not apologize. Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Do not apologize. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: hms2004
» Oh, tell it, Easy! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: But wait! There's more! Posted by: Longdream
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: jareilly
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Lauren
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: ibolyap
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: daniel w vermillion
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: serioussomebody
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: indepentent

Comments are closed-

..." The chickens, are...'a comin' "...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dave1616 on May 12, 2008 3:58 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
please see www.discussrace.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Blacks' Grotesque Insult To Hillary
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ot on May 12, 2008 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Clintons have always been staunch advocates of the Black community. That is why Blacks "have given so much support to both Bill and Hillary over the years". And, as further payback, Blacks are now displaying their inherent racism by turning their backs on their friends and voting for Obama just because he is (half) Black. The irony, of course, is that they are really only voting for a weak and effeminate Uncle Tom, pre-sold to special interests, who will crumble under the first serious pressures of a US presidency. If anyone has a right to be insulted it is Hillary at the turncoat tactics of Black voters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Michelle Obama's Thesis Posted by: Prairie Waif
» Reply to Mandy's Post Posted by: Prairie Waif
» Ted Sorensen writes his speeches. Posted by: sallythewally
» Is that all you have, Quannah? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» Proven a liar? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Proven a liar? Posted by: Longdream
» Who's lying Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Who's lying Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Who's lying Posted by: Quannah
» Weasel words Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Weasel words Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Except to say Posted by: Longdream
» ???? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Is that all you have, Quannah? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Is that all you have, Quannah? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» You nailed it! Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: Tsk, Tsk. Posted by: Longdream
» You flatter yourself Posted by: xconservative
» RE: Inherently racist??? Posted by: mattbrown46

Comments are closed-

Racist Americans
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Abushite on May 12, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why no classification of British Americans, French Americans etc ... etc..
Because the American Mindset has to classify every human in some format !!! What about American, or would that embarrass - when considering the only Americans that can be labeled American are NATIVE Americans - the rest are occupiers.

Barack Obama is more American than many that are busily applying labels.

Mrs Clinton is an American, who is a proven lier - Kosovo , A thief - taking property from the Whitehouse, Corrupt - the cattle futures, WhiteWaters, Acceptance of gross immorality
in her home.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» African-Irish-American! Posted by: foreverhope
» RE: African-Irish-American! Posted by: kimbari
» Proud Afro-Celtic-American Posted by: Kym525
» RE: acist Americans Posted by: Lauren
» RE: acist Americans Posted by: Paul1939
» RE: acist Americans Posted by: Paul1939

Comments are closed-

Antiquated Demographics & Stratedgies are showing
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 12, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just because you say it - DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE!
Between Hillary and the Media, I'm Not sure who has been a HERMIT longer.
Their suppositions to the Demographic and 'Pulse of America' confirms they are Liars and Delusional.How long has it been sinc eany of them have stepped out of their Ivory fortress'?
When's the last time they spoke to a Sociologist, and Anthrologist a Historian who is Not a Corp Spinner, A "Yes Man/Madame" who will say anything tokeep their jobs regardless of Reality. Ignorance and arrogance is not their only Archilles Heel- but the mind numbing effects of their own propaganda and silencing of the Truth and elnlightened Dissent.AmericaNs stopped buying 'they hate US for Our Freedoms' when we saw what th etargets were on 9/11. It was Not US,but THEM who were attacked (we were the innocent victims they had been using as Human shields for Decades), Most of US Never bought into their 'blame the Vicitms' Deflection of Guilt Techniques- But we were Silenced, Gagged and Shackled and 'Waterboarded ' when we could Send out smoke signals to our fellow citizens regarding the LIES!Called 'Conspiracy Theorist Crazies', 'Traitors' ,'Cowards', 'UNAMERICAN'. It is not the 'Terrorist' who Hate Americans Freedoms, Rights and progresive Philosphies it it those who provoked the atttacks on 9/11 through their immoral and Unethical global Business Practices.They have proven their agenda and Goals since 9/11 to bring Down everything that We Stand For- gutted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Pissed on the Spirit and guiding Force behind The Declaration of Independence "WE THE PEOPLE"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hard to read Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: Hard to read Posted by: writer7
» RE: Hard to read Posted by: Prairie Waif
» Communication as a goal Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Communication as a goal Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Can Somebody Tell Me What the Clintons Have Ever Done for African-Americans??
[Report this comment]
Posted by: redbird30328 on May 12, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The mythology and reality are wildly divergent. Other than (or perhaps including) attending some funerals, I don't see anything other than consistent exploitation of a demographic group for political advantage. Oh, I forgot, Bill saw films of MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech a few times.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That's easy Posted by: Iconoclast421
» What, you want facts or something! Posted by: texshelters

Comments are closed-

Personally . . .
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Scientz on May 12, 2008 5:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . I've grown tired of Manichean American racism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Strange ratings Posted by: westomoon
» Yup, that's manichean too Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Gemajabe
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gemajabe on May 12, 2008 5:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Herbert-You have been pumping up Obama since the beginning, not because he is the most progressive candidate (Kucinich and Edwards were better), but I would suspect because he is half Black. This is understandable. What is not understandable is your inability to see the entrenched misogany in this society. I have been voting for President since 1960. I have always had the choice between two males. Do you think this is an accident? When the history of this primary, when a competent, experienced woman had a real shot at the White House, it will be about sexism, not racism. Journalists like you insult and demonize Hillary Clinton and would do so to any woman, because you would prefer a male. Very sad, very demoralizing for women like me who have worked so hard for a better world for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: Quannah
» Save the drama for your Mama.... Posted by: Fencerider
» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: Addressing Marion Berry Posted by: desidid
» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: zeek2
» I want a woman President too Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

The syntax is really troublesome.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on May 12, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, I have a complaint about the article. Exactly half of it is a diatribe against the Clintons, a gratuitous collection of old Republican talking points.

But the phrase Senator Clinton used, "...working, hard-working Americans, white Americans..." seems to stress an association between "hard working", "white" and "American." Obviously she is pandering to working whites. It also seems to be an oblique shot at Obama supporters who are depicted in the media as blacks and elites.

Her comment seems to define Obama supporters as not hard working, not white, and/or not American.

Also troubling is that I haven't seen Senator Clinton apologize for, or even explain the comment, which really should have happened the moment she realized what had come out of her mouth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» She doesn't apologize Posted by: westomoon
» RE: She doesn't apologize Posted by: Lauren
» RE: She doesn't apologize Posted by: Longdream
» Whether intentional or not Posted by: texshelters

Comments are closed-

Mr. Herbert is correct.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Quannah on May 12, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And we now see what the Clintons' "win-at-all-costs" strategy has gotten them - it's cost Hillary the nomination. People can blame Obama for her loss (he has received more votes and more delegates, after all!) or blame black voters (last time I checked, aren't we all supposed to be free to vote our conscience?) but they don't place the blame where it should lie: squarely with the Clinton's themselves.

Both Bill and Hillary have played the race card in this primary. They have both used "code language" to urge whites to vote for them, not Obama. They have exploited the racial divide in this country in order to further separate the party into color-coded factions, which is absolutely despicable. Dirty tricks even the Republics haven't yet tried (but I'm sure they will now, seeing that Hillary did it... what a precedent to set, huh?)

It was the Clinton's who decided to take this to the gutter, and it's there they should rightfully finish this whole mess. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Can I get an "Amen"! Posted by: Fencerider
» Amen! Posted by: texshelters
» RE: Mr. Herbert is correct. Posted by: ConsiderChange

Comments are closed-

Ruthless, Race-Carding Hillary - reposting
[Report this comment]
Posted by: foreverhope on May 12, 2008 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Frank Rich: Ruthless, Race-Carding Hillary
By Mark Finkelstein | February 10, 2008 - 08:05 ET
[A] synthetic product leeched of most human qualities. -- Frank Rich, on how Hillary Clinton is being marketed, Feb. 10, 2008.

If Frank Rich is the voice of elite liberal opinion, Hillary Clinton is in deep, deep trouble. How many folks on the Upper West Side and reasonable facsimiles thereof from Boston to Madison to LA will be opening their hearts -- or credit cards -- to Hillary after reading Rich's stunning indictment of Clinton and her campaign this morning?

The jumping-off point for Rich's column is the live prime-time special the night before Super Tuesday that the Clinton campaign conducted. Flashing his theater-critic roots, Rich panned it as a "boring" "pseudo-event," noting that "some in attendance appeared to trance out." But if the staging was bad, the substance was much, much worse in Rich's view. For he claims that it reflected nothing less than Clinton playing from a "thick deck of race cards."

Writes Rich [emphasis added]:

In its carefully calibrated cross section of geographically and demographically diverse cast members — young, old, one gay man, one vet, two union members — African-Americans were reduced to also-rans. One black woman, the former TV correspondent Carole Simpson, was given the servile role of the meeting’s nominal moderator, Ed McMahon to Mrs. Clinton’s top banana. Scattered black faces could be seen in the audience. But in the entire televised hour, there was not a single African-American questioner, whether to toss a softball or ask about the Clintons’ own recent misadventures in racial politics.

The Clinton camp does not leave such matters to chance. This decision was a cold, political cost-benefit calculus. In October, seven months after the two candidates’ dueling church perorations in Selma, USA Today found Hillary Clinton leading Mr. Obama among African-American Democrats by a margin of 62 percent to 34 percent. But once black voters met Mr. Obama and started to gravitate toward him, Bill Clinton and the campaign’s other surrogates stopped caring about what African-Americans thought.

I must say, the fact that the tightly-scripted Clinton campaign didn't permit a single question from a black viewer during an hour-long event is nothing short of shocking.

[T]his show was a dramatic encapsulation of how a once-invincible candidate ended up in a dead heat, crippled by poll-tested corporate packaging that markets her as a synthetic product leeched of most human qualities.

Less than two weeks ago she was airlifted into her own, less effective version of “Mission Accomplished.” Instead of declaring faux victory in Iraq, she starred in a made-for-television rally declaring faux victory in a Florida primary that was held in defiance of party rules, involved no campaigning and awarded no delegates. As Andrea Mitchell of NBC News said, it was “the Potemkin village of victory celebrations.”

The Clinton campaign might be an imploding Potemkin village itself were it not for the fungible profits from Bill Clinton’s murky post-presidency business deals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Longdream
» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Quannah
» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE:HMMMMPH! Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

Hard to Admit: The US Is Still a Racist Society
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ChicagoPaul on May 12, 2008 6:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Truth in Packaging Here: Old (Retired), Hard-Working, Middle Class, and White. I happen to be from Illinois and have been an Obama support from his State Senator days.

Senator Clinton is not necessarily a racist. She is, however, pandering to (not so) latent racist tendencies, not just in West Virginia or in the South, but in the entire United States.

She is pandering. It's what politicians do. Senator Obama has been caught pandering, too.

The bigger problem, which is shamefully not addressed in this forum or in most places today, is that we are still a racist society. I'll say it again: We have made very little progress in the 232 years since the concept of "all men (people) are created equal" was first penned. We can do better than we have. That both Clinton and Obama have gotten as far as they have is a testament to the fact that we are working on the problem.

However, since we are still asking the questions "Is the US ready for a black president?" or "Is the US ready for a woman president?" you can only deduce that we are not only still a racist society, but also a sexist society.

Senator Obama points out that we are not, as yet, a Perfect Union. Dr. King's dream of judging a person by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin is still a dream.

That's why Senator Clinton's "pander" is so destructive: It is not helpful in constructing a more perfect union and it damages the dream.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hold on there C.Paul... Posted by: ConsiderChange

Comments are closed-

Can we end the flag waving?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: LeslieGem on May 12, 2008 6:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I think is ridiculous is how the politicians fall all over themselves to call the folks living in rural areas "hard working" "patriotic" etc. etc. Because that's who Hilary was talking about -- white, rural, probably working class or lower middle class voters. Of course they are hard working -- we all are! What about the folks who live in urban areas? Aren't we hard working? A foreigner listening to all of this would think that the only people who work for a living or have any love for this country are the folks out in the country and us urban people sit around all day eating bon-bons and spitting on the flag! It’s patronizing to people in rural areas and insulting to those in urban ones.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe not racist.... Posted by: Fencerider
» RE: Can we end the flag waving? Posted by: ChicagoPaul
» Ah, you "effete" city slickers! Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

McCain for president, Hillary for VP, and Liebermann for SS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Gregory Kruse on May 12, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fate can be generous and fate can be cruel. Hillary became a Democrat because she wanted to join Bill's team. She is still really a Republican. The only thing that could redeem her in the eyes of Democrats is to come out of the closet and run as McCain's mate. All would be forgiven, and everyone would breathe a sigh of relief. The media would have something to chew on for months even after the election, win or lose. She is the only one who can save the Republicans from oblivion, so as a matter of necessity, they would accept her with open arms. She would bring many older white women and working class white people into the Republican party. This is too good a scenario to not happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Are We Above Reproach?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JohnJlws on May 12, 2008 6:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The question should not be “why did he stay?” but “why didn’t we listen?”
When “The Reverend” damned our nation we should have analyzed the reason behind his condemnation the same way we should evaluate Farrakhan’s ideas, or wondered when Muhammed Ali said "I got nothin' against the North Vietnamese. They never called me 'nigger.’” Instead the MSM reported only “I got nothin’ against the North Vietnamese” and Ali was lynched for his objection to a war that never should have been authorized and never should have been waged. In full context Ali’s words were no less a stinging indictment of the fact we have failed to include all our population in this “great” experiment in democracy than are Farrakhan’s or “The Reverend’s.”

Instead of serious debate we have weeks of sound bites of “The Reverend” and questioning “what does this mean about this man running for president?” When in fact many weren’t questioning anything, as we so often do, but simply measuring one candidate by a bar set at a different level than the one set for all others and justifying that little inner voice that tells us we should “cross the street as the black man’s coming.” We should instead, and automatically, have viewed an entire life and embraced someone who has the courage to not only listen to contrary opinion, but stand up and say I will not disown this man with ideas I don’t agree with. I have not, in 50 years, seen this sort of courage in politics. We should instead be questioning those who cannot listen to diverse or contrary opinion as the primary example of this behavior sits in the White House and the other candidates running seem to have the same affliction.

Groups like the Swift Boat Clowns for Half-Truth and Innuendo will scare the living daylights out of white America and when they’re done not only will we see a most qualified candidate completely vilified, we’ll once again put the negro in his place and there will be only the slightest whimper of public outcry as we mourn the death yet again of the vision embodied in that single clause in our Declaration.

I cannot, even in my wee little brain, answer simple questions like why is there a different penalty for crack cocaine versus powder cocaine? This question should haunt everyone who thinks because it points to the absolute disparity that exists in a system that we tout as “blind” and yet she provides limited justice to those people of color who have a greater tendency to be involved in crack cocaine. And, if she’s not blind to the simple things, is she anymore sightless to the bigger picture?

We get excited that “he can’t capture the white vote” when the bigger concern isn’t that “she’s lost virtually the entire black vote,” but why is this even a topic of discussion? Why in 2008 are we still thinking a black candidate will get the black vote, a woman will get the female vote and McCain will get votes because people are stupid (not really, but I cannot figure out why anyone wants to continue the policies of the last 8 years and that is McCain)?

So when the Clintons attempt to “Willie Horton” Barack, I am not surprised. Unfortunately I am not surprised when this sort of drivel finds significant traction, when our mass media continue to report “this story,” and when we continue to listen to suggestions that skills sets and expertise are somehow associated with age, sex, or race. “All men [and women] are created equal” is, and always has been, a dream, but we’ve only come a certain distance based on our perception in our quest of this goal and we should not be too self-congratulatory of our progress because for those of us walking in white shoes the strides can seem tremendous, but for many others we have yet to crawl—we’ll see this election if we’re finally able to take a tenuous step.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Are We Above Reproach? Posted by: dgleason
» RE: Are We Above Reproach? Posted by: ibolyap

Comments are closed-

She's an ungainly speaker who was paraphrasing poll data.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ABetterFuture on May 12, 2008 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real question to her critics on this particular oh-so-heinous-reality-based-slur is which is more offensive--polling data or Clinton herself? You folks do know that they take polling data, and much of it is demographically based?

FYI, you don't have to be a racist to vote for Clinton, and you don't have to be a mysogynist to vote for Obama.

Go figure, lol, "progressively"!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Relevance please?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JohnJlws on May 12, 2008 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sorry, but I'm struggling to see the relevance between your post and the one you're responding to. That said I'm not sure why in these discussions we stoop to name calling and disrespect. "nobama,” “empty suit,” or "Billary" or "McBush.” I think one can make their arguments more cogent by dropping the name-calling and simply saying things like "I don't believe Obama has the depth of experience we need although he is a great orator," or "I believe Clinton has demonstrated she doesn't have the judgment to lead simply with her tragically poor decision on Iraq which has cost this nation so dearly," or "McCain will continue the disastrous policies of the preceding administration as he has already embraced them and I simply cannot support this direction."

An intelligent conversation I believe demands we respect not only the candidates, but their supporters (each other). As a person who "drank the Kool-aid" early on (and often), who has gotten over his fear of "HUSSEIN!!!" and the "Muslim conspiracy" and has worked through all the comments suggesting I somehow must have Velcro-strapped shoes because I’m not smart enough to tie a shoelace and therefore probably lack the cognitive ability to do even rudimentary analysis, I would welcome a debate of my choice, but I'm not going to condemn the others through name calling. I support Barack not because I fail to see value in Clinton (she brings a tremendous dynamic to this debate and I respect her patriotism and her service), but because I see far more possibility and hope in his vision and therefore our future. (Oh, by the way, I didn’t give you the rating, but I probably would put a 2 or 3 on yours simply because I couldn’t see the relevance to the original post.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

SPEAKING OF CHICKENS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: master09 on May 12, 2008 9:17 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America has lied to itself for a very long time and is failing as we speak. This country must realize that the world has changed and is changing everyday and what is it that we are talking about; Whites, Blacks Racist, Hillary, Bill, and all the other bullshit that does not mean a thing to the rest of the world. Here’s what about to happen, the only person that stands between Obama and presidency is Hillary Clinton; the establishment already know this(so call Republicans and Democrats)it is apparent that he will be elected and they would have to give up all the secrets and believe me America and its government have some secrets; they are not so worried about Obama but Michelle is another matter, they are not too certain about her, so impeachment is on the table or some other bullshit that they would use to get rid of him; oh! make no mistake they would/will impeach him. I shouldn’t have to remind anyone why they tried to impeach Clinton but would not impeach a crook that was on the verge of destroying the whole dam country. There have been a lot of lies told and lot of secrets kept, I believe the Jig is up,THE CHICKENS ARE HOME.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Liam
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Liam on May 12, 2008 9:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From "day one" of her campaign Billery Clinton has just added to the reasons she should not be president or even considered for president.

I admit it...I didn't like Bill - never liked her..but we Clinton detractors could not even imagine the tasteless, venal classless behavior the two of them have demonstrated.

Bubba Bill destroy 50% of the Democratic Party in 8 years...Hillary would finish it off! As a retired union official it is beyond me why any worker (man, woman, any race, etc) would support someone so ego driven and self centered. Just unbelievable she has any labor support! Go Obama!!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liam Posted by: ConsiderChange
» Link to Hillary's Campaign Website Posted by: Prairie Waif

Comments are closed-

The Racist, Warmongering Democratic Party
[Report this comment]
Posted by: shinseiji on May 12, 2008 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article is relevant to the tenor of the entire primary campaign season. The real political nature of the Democratic Party has been expose for all but the usual self-deluded leftists, liberals and progressives. This nature is not restricted to this or that individual, but permeates the entire Party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

"We have met the enemy and it is us"....Pogo
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HomerScarborough on May 12, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why are we spending so much time demonizing Hillary when if it were another black man, nothing would be said other than it was politics and the loser was entitled to fight as long as they wanted. "It ain't over until the fat lady sings." The fat lady does not sing until the nominee is selected at the National convention.

It is interesting (and tragic) to watch as we set ourselves up to see John McCain elected by the largest majority since Johnson defeated Goldwater. This is not because of Hillary, it is because we have cooperated with the Republicans in getting nominated a man that cannot be elected in 2008, to run against their nominee. The result will be the opportunity to watch as John McCain is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. Bummer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yes, indeed! Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

There is only one Race..The Human Race..
[Report this comment]
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on May 12, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until the pundits start to teach people that we are 99.6% genetically identical to chimpanzees and so there is only a .4% differential between we so called humans and Chimpanzees which means any slight difference between us is scientifically immeasurable and that there are no different races only one race the Human Race nothing will ever change..

Bob and we've met, do you think you are a different Race from me an Italian American so called, do you believe you're a different Race from me..or someone from China or a Hispanic well I got news for you brother you ain't, you and I and YO Yo Ma and Tiger Woods and Osama bin-Laden and George Bush, Michael Jordan and Paul Simon are all the same Race...like it or not..?

It's The 21st Century and there is only one Race there are no different Human Races that is a scientific fact..!

Only The Human Race, as F^cked up as we all are we are all the same Race..Homo Sapien..Human only one race, The Human Race..

Get it..?

Good..!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Hmmm - Ver-r-r- y Interesting ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Lyrren54 on May 12, 2008 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been reading the comments on this article with interest, and it's quite telling, the sheer number of people who are buying into the BS about the African American voting block backing Obama without question because of his race, as well as the BS about the Clintons' racially divisive comments and obvious appeals to the alleged latent racism of white, blue collar/working-class voting block.

Rather than jump on the 'betrayal' bandwagon, I had hoped that white voters would be as INCENSED as many of us in the African American community are, rather than buy into the noise. Tsk-tsk.

I'm one of those votng African Americans you all are denigrating, and I'll have you know that I have supported the Clintons politically from the time he was governor of Arkansas, through Hilary's election and tenure as the junior Senator from New York, just as everyone I know with similar political views in every community I've lived in over that period - whether black, white, red, hispanic, or pink with polkadots.

And UNTIL she started using racial code words and lying, I supported Hilary whole-heartedly - our community supported her. We are NOW supporting OBAMA, not because he's black or half-black, or whatever, but because it is apparent that he is going to be the nominee and Mrs Clinton has unequivocally shown herself to be without any standards as to how low she will sink to get what she wants.

I'm very politically active, so perhaps can speak with some authority to what the African American community has been thinking, and reports to the contrary, African American support of Obama's candidacy was not at 90% until it became apparent that he was out-polling Mrs. Clinton, and not until she started pulling out every trick in the book, including the old 'race-bait-and-switch' tactics that have served the Republican party so well in years past.

I won't support anyone who thinks I am so stupid as to vote based on race, nor would I support anyone who thinks my white neighbors and friends are just as stupid.

She cut her own throat. The African American community has not betrayed her, she shot herself in the foot, and is apparently too stupid to stop.

I've given this woman every bit of funding and support I could throw behind her over the years, just as I have done for her husband, and she has shat upon me and mine.

At this point, I'd support Rin-Tin-Tin if he were running against her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» BEAUTIFUL post! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Hmmm - Ver-r-r- y Interesting ... Posted by: photon's feather
» Oh Please Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: margwa
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: margwa
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: desidid
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Hmmm - Ver-r-r- y Interesting ... Posted by: ConsiderChange

Comments are closed-

Winning...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bluepilgrim on May 12, 2008 10:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's all about winning. I doubt Hillary is (much of) a racist, but she plays one on TV. She will play anything if she thinks it will help her win.

That much of what she has played has helped her lose, however, speaks to her incompetence, as well as to her personal integrity. If she thinks 'obliterate Iran' will sell, then she will say that, and if she is elected and it helps her get re-elected, or gain more power, she will do it too. It's like the amoral corporate networks: say or do anything as long as it sells. That's what politics has been about these past years: winning, power, and greed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Winning... Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

dangergirl
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dangergirl on May 12, 2008 10:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now I may be mistaken; it happened once, but I seem to recall that the highly circulated "news" regarding stolen furniture and the supposed "trashed" condition of the White House was actually fabricated misinformation. Courtesy of the faux journalists found mostly on TV. Of course, the news stories correcting the lies weren't as widely broadcast nor near oft-repeated. Go figure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The re-emergence of Race
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Spot on May 12, 2008 10:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have you noticed what this clinton/obama campaign has done to us? we are all, after decades of believing the race card played out, again identifying ourselves to our communities primarily as a member of a race.

The internet is the only place where we can meet both anonymously and face to face, yet we pollute it by bringing in excess baggage, the politics of race.

does anyone believe that the color of a person's skin will determine the quality of their ideas? will it give us insight into truth? no. it can only shade their experience.

I am not advocating an ignorance of race; it has historically been, and i believe that this campaign shows it continues to be, an important distinction people at large make between them. what i advocate is a post-racism philosophy. it must not be the basis of our relations, but it will remain a portion of them.

when we talk about race, we unavoidably become entangled in the histories of the civil rights movement, black nationalism, and other cultures that many whites are unfamiliar (and frankly uncomfortable) with.

So what do we do?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: desidid
» RE: desidid Posted by: westomoon
» RE: westomoon Posted by: desidid
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: Longdream
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: desidid
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: Longdream
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: westomoon
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: Longdream
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: desidid
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Like Lyrren54...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Kym525 on May 12, 2008 10:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I too am an Obama supporter who just so happens to be black and female. Many of you know me and some of us have crossed words before so you know I can easily stand my ground as to WHY I am supporting him, and you all know I have NEVER mentioned his skin color being a reason.

I have ceased to be appalled at the level of ignorance I find in such a liberal site as alternet. The fact is I have seen more virulent racism expressed by so many so-called "liberals" in this forum that would make the losers who run Stormfront.org jealous and then wonder where most of you have been all this time. The difference between my so-called "liberal" bretheren and the Klan is becoming marginal everyday. At least those in the Klan, however heinous their beliefs, are at least a damn sight more honest. I can live with that.

I used to have all the respect in the world for Hilary Clinton (and even for Bill even though he was a total coward when it came to Lani Guinier and Jocelyn Elders), but it's pretty much been toast since she allied herself with Bush the warmonger and has been steadily going downhill. The thing is, Hilary is a smart woman and she had to have known her statements about "hard-working, white Americans" was designed to play into the hands of the bigot contingent who would rather take themselves and their families to hell than even vote for a black man who does share a great deal of their history. Her words were a bitter reminder that in the eyes of way too many whites, black folks don't work (an irony that since it was our ancestors brought over in tiny cargo holds to pick YOUR fucking cotton because well, your ancestors were obviously too lazy), and in spite of having built this country, fought and died for this country, are still not thought of as AMERICANS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Like Lyrren54... Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Like Lyrren54... Posted by: Kym525
» You say things like that Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: *Psssst!* Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

Hypocricy knows no bounds
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dayahka on May 12, 2008 11:05 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clinton spoke the truth, whether we like it or not. America is a racist society, Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and others notwithstanding. The "whites" are putting up a stand. The standard in American presidential politics has always been--white, male. White female is pushing it. Black is way beyond the line. It might be nice to try to wish and imagine our way to a truly pluralistic society beyond race, but it ain't going to happen so long as you have West Virginia. You are right that Clinton has no class and is the epitome of crass ambition, but who's become president who wasn't?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Some of them may be like me Posted by: xconservative
» RE: REPUGS? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Hypocricy knows no bounds Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

The Clintons
[Report this comment]
Posted by: estherme on May 12, 2008 11:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I voted for Clinton twice, but today I woudn't have after finding information my research has brought! See www.truestoriesvideoblog.info (telling the truth in universal deceit) See this documented video on what hell the Clintons did in Arkansas when he was governor. The press there kept all info. secret. See this "Clinton Chronicles" video. While on the site check out the videos on the Bush family's connection to Hitler & Nazi's. Then see the video on how the Federal Reserve started & the corrupt things they did & are still doing. This is one website of many with reliable information. People need to do more research on our history, gov't & politicians and less time watching the puff news of "American Idol!"
There is no excuse anymore, now that we have the internet. By the way, that's the next target of our corrupt gov't & corporations!They don't want an open internet. They want to control it as they do TV news & newspapers! When we finally have a Fascist nation, the only thing you will be able to do is to watch "American Idol." That may be okay with the fans, but not okay with Americans who believe in our Constitution!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Yes, America is largely racist
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bluepilgrim on May 12, 2008 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but I suspect there is more here, once we get past skin tones.

Blacks tend to be poorer, have less education, and otherwise get the short end of the stick -- tend to form much of the 'undeclass'. As such they are more sensitive to economic *class differences* in the country, and the propaganda of the ruling class (the pro-empire and pro-corporate stuff). In short, Blacks are more likely to see through the scams and jive of the economic and political elites. Black vs white often serves as a placeholder for the class warfare which has been going on almost forever in this country.

What about New Orleans? Were the people abandoned because they were Black or poor, or both? What about the huge disparity in the rate of incarceration? Black, poor, or both? It's often hard to tell the difference.

Clinton talks about being for the people, but it was Obama who worked for the poor/Black people in Chicago, and I see that as an important difference between them. I see Clinton as now being more on the side of the money and political elite than Obama is.

I see this as part of the class warfare the elite has waged on the working poor, and on the middle class who are fast becoming poor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Specifics, please... Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

There was a time
[Report this comment]
Posted by: willymack on May 12, 2008 11:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I thought: Hoo, boy; have the Dems got it made! Two great candidates, the polar opposites of bushco, both truly educated and INTELLIGENT, unlike the zero disgracing the office of President, and each in his or her way, finally establishing a long delayed breakthrough in American politics. What could possibly go wrong with this? Ha! Stupid question as it turns out. Through the sheer arrogance and obstinate ignorance of the facts, Ms Clinton has made it possible for four more years of our history's worst nightmare to occur in the person of insane John McCain. What was to be a resounding refutation of the runious neocon domination of our society has turned into a pointless free-for-all, which may well end in a defeat for the Democrats in November, and for us all, as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Hillary is not a racist.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HughScott on May 12, 2008 11:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Her pathetic political pandering aside, I don't believe Senator Clinton is prejudiced against black people. But for sure, she's an elitist.

By definition, elitism means "the belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources."

Hillary believes she should be president because of her eight-year residence in the White House where she rubbed elbows with America's power elite and fellow multi-millionaires.

To avoid being labeled a privileged member of uppercrust society, she used Karl Rove's playbook and accused Obama of being an elitist which, of course, is patently absurd.

That's something else I can't stand about Mrs. Sniper Fire -- her unmitigated arrogance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hillary is not a racist. Posted by: Digital Gentleman
» RE: Hillary is not a racist. Posted by: ConsiderChange
» RE: Hillary is not a racist. Posted by: Democritus

Comments are closed-

Follow the Money
[Report this comment]
Posted by: thehousedog on May 12, 2008 12:34 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about this as a way to measure, instead of race or votes? Money!

Hillary has raised lots of money - and even with all the supposed support from everybody who she thinks supports her - she is in debt to the tune of nearly $20Million.

Obama has raised lots of money - and kept it all - effectively showing that he knows how to (1) manage a campaign; and (2) knows how to be a fiscally prudent manager.

That he got more votes and delegates along the way is gravy. He's got the money and she does not.

Do you support Hillary for whatever reason? Did you put your money where you mouth is?

Do you support Obama for whatever reason?
Did you put your money where you mouth is?

Sad - but money makes the difference this time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Works for me! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Follow the Money Posted by: Lauren
» More delegates? Posted by: sallythewally

Comments are closed-

Why She Intends to Wreck Obama's Chances
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cellis56 on May 12, 2008 1:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is obvious that Clinton doesn't care that she has already lost the nomination. She continues to smear Obama because she wants McCain to win the presidency. Why? Because he will either f**k it up royally (likely) and/or die in office. In any event, she's looking to re-start her candidacy in 2012 when (thanks to her) Obama would conceivably be just another also ran. She could care less about the trashing of the Constitution (something she voted for in the form of the Patriot Act), the corruption of George Bush's presidency (did she vote to impeach the SOB?), the money grabbers at Halliburton, Bechtel, etc. (she's one too), and as for her concern for the poor--that canard is so pathetic it doesn't even deserve a response. But take this one: She and Bill dismantled welfare as we know it and they were busy working out a scheme to privatize Social Security when Bill was caught with his pants down. They have their hearts set on gutting the treasury (or what Dubya has left in it) and that's why she shed a tear. Obama--the nerve of that "boy"--makes it s hard for her and she's entitled! Entitled, I tell you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» If Obama loses the GE Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: If Obama loses the GE Posted by: Longdream
» It's so convenient Posted by: Left of center

Comments are closed-

Possibly the best thing ever to happen on Alternet!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: jwhitneywise on May 12, 2008 1:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love this. Offering constructive criticism on how we might improve our discourse! This fostering of growth and cooperation is what Alternet should be promoting all of the time, not the argumentativeness and name-calling among those who can't agree who is more liberal and which candidate is worse...and have you ever noticed that those are the posters with the worst grammar? I'm personally inspired to start editing posts and I urge other readers to do so as well!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Actual source material?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Phenix on May 12, 2008 3:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I need to actually hear this quote to believe it. I take any and everything from the New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post and well you get the picture with a grain of salt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You can hear it and see it... Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Actual source material? Posted by: desidid

Comments are closed-

The Clintons have no CLASS???
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ky Lake Dave on May 12, 2008 3:56 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are the dumb-ass Democrats just figuring that out? Did the Democratic blindfold to taste, class and morals just fall off? Could it be that the Vast Right Conspirators had it right all along? AND… if they were right then … could be they are right about Obama NOW!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Troll Central
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Rosasharn on May 12, 2008 5:41 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rabid trolls are taking over this site. Is this Limbaugh strategy? Whatever it is, it's becoming extremely difficult to find anything that isn't coated in this 'hate Hillary' slime. I do happen to remember the Clinton years, which were dominated by peace and prosperity, albeit infused with the endless witch hunting. In fact, all these so called democrats on this site sure sound an awful lot like those old voices, filled with hate for the Clinton charisma. I, personally, am very impressed with Hillary's ability to stand tall throughout this entire campaign. She won't cave and 'you' can't handle a woman of this caliber. She's as tough as nails, and the last time I looked, that's what we need in a leader. Just like FDR, Hillary will make her grand achievements IN OFFICE. And won't it be great to have Obama sitting in the office next door, the vice-president's office.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Troll Central Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Troll Central Posted by: Quannah
» Such Clouded Memories Posted by: Rosasharn
» RE: Such Clouded Memories Posted by: xconservative
» A progressive troll on a progressive site? Posted by: photon's feather

Comments are closed-

A thought
[Report this comment]
Posted by: SOWILO on May 12, 2008 5:45 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know, I'm getting a bit tired about hearing how racist America is. I know we have a checkered past. But what country doesn't. White countries have no monopoly on genocide and slavery. Look at the history of many countries in Africa for instance.

Here in Los Angeles, we have a pretty diverse community with Latinos holding high public office. We have, for the most part, many different cultures working side by side. Most of the racism here is not white on black or white on Latino, but really vicious racism between blacks and Latinos. Whites aren't even in the picture in most regards since we are a minority here. There are many minority business owners. My boss is an African American for a very successful design studio.

I'm not denying racism exists, but if you look to the EU, which is more progressive than the U.S. in some regards, ask yourself how far a black man would get in a campaign for the presidency of any European country or a Prime Minister's position.

This shrill "racist America" talk is getting rather tedious. It is reinforcing victim attitudes among minorities and reactionary sentiments amongst working-class whites that are not helpful.

Just my two cents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Your two cents just lost value Posted by: photon's feather
» Racism against Obama Posted by: fanny666

Comments are closed-

larry
[Report this comment]
Posted by: larryk on May 12, 2008 9:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is too polite about the Clintons who ran the most corrupt administration since Grant (check it out the convictions and absconders from justice in his administration) pardongate, travelgate, whitewater, Marc Rich, the Lincoln bedroom rentals, missing furnishings, Tysons, China, Mena are still just the tip of the iceberg.
I would truly like to know what they did for anyone but themselves in 8 years. NAFTA was his only majopr legislative accomplishment - which was Republican sunion-busting policy, foreign policy was either too late (Bosnia) or never (Rwanda). Except getting elected - which made them multimillionares - they never succeeded at anything significant - Health Care reform is only one relevant example. All I remember about their attitude toward African Americans was Queen Latifa, Republican welfare reform, and that illegitimate kid. I have no idea why Toni Morrison made her comment, but check out Alice Walker on theroot.com for a more through analysis than one throwaway line from a White House guest made into a slogan by the media. Their corruption so polarized the country people thought W would be relief from the lies and low life behavior they brought to the White House. It sure was not their politics, because they did't do anything with their triangulation "strategy" which meant unprincipled opportunist paths of least resistance. They pardoned criminals who paid, but could not release Leonard Peltier, a poet. You people that like the Clintons need to go read a book - any book about them they or their retainers did not write. A media that has given them a free ride is no excuse. Start with Sam Smith for example (progrev.com). I haven't even mentioned Vince Foster and the other unsolved crimes of their era. Ignorance is curable. It is a total mystery why anyone that knows anything about them would support the Clinton's again. Look at her campaign: dysfunctional and overpaid - a bunch of mercenaries. Thank God and Barack Obama that we are all but rid of them. Its the first step toward healing this country. With Obama we can start paying attention to issues rather than symptoms of sociopathology. Obama is going to win in a landslide. The guy with the loose bearing doesn't have a (I was going to say prayer - but the media has been so busy with J.Wright we haven't yet heard from his Catholic-hating gay-bashing minister) hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: larry Posted by: OK Granny

Comments are closed-

freedom in america
[Report this comment]
Posted by: davebarry on May 12, 2008 9:15 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whatever happen to equality? Blacks can be 90% for Obama but if only 40% of the white democrats are for Hillary, than we are profiling. Blacks used to call Bill Clinton the first black president. And I believe most people of my status had a good economic life under the Clintons.I will vote for the democrat that gets the nomination.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Economic Life Posted by: bessie

Comments are closed-

Ghastly Hillary
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bessie on May 12, 2008 10:31 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are few words left for or about Hillary. It's tedious, ghastly and beyond belief. The first time I felt this way was when that Green guy tried to portray Obama as a drug dealer & an Uncle Tom-oreo with his "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" reference in a really wierd sentence. Hillary just sat there & smiled smugly.You have to be of a certain age to pick up on some of this stuff but it's been shocking except to say that it reminded me of my own high school experiences. I wanted to think that Hillary didn't really understand. Of course she did, she just said it point blank.I have no idea how anyone could not think of her as a racist, as she's employed everything that would create a racial divide. That's my definition of a racist and anyone can try to sugarcoat it - but it's ghastly and that's Hillary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ghastly Hillary Posted by: OK Granny
» RE: Methodists Hate Whites? Posted by: bessie

Comments are closed-

HILLARY CLINTON IS A CLASSY LADY.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: OK Granny on May 12, 2008 10:45 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not agree with the author's assessment of Mrs. Clinton. The media has consistently taken words out of context or twisted the meaning. The Clintons have always respected the AAs in this country.
I find the remarks from Obama bragging about his being the first AA on the Harvard Review over the top in arrogance and his remarks about his white grandmother insulting.
Rational thinkers do not believe a man would sit in a church for 20 years if he did not believe in the fundemental teachings of that church. Obama's church is hate-mongering and racist against White people. The church believes that BLACKS ARE THE CHOSEN PEOPLE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What are you talking about? Posted by: bessie
» Arrogance Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

OBAMA CAMPAIGN SINKS TO NEW LOW
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mindtrvlr on May 12, 2008 11:42 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary is one of the last people to be racist. This article is nothing but trash. I see the Obamaites have learned well from George Bushes tactics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:Sugarcoat Posted by: bessie
» RE: AMEN, West! Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Bill's Flashback Posted by: desidid
» "Osama Obama"? Posted by: xconservative

Comments are closed-

Obama's Grotesque Insult to American Women
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JKR on May 13, 2008 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, believe it or not, that is how some of us feel about Obama's campaign. Hillary is constantly vilified while Obama is "untouchable" because he is an African American and nobody wants to be seen as a racist. Well, guess what, everyone who has made any question about Obama's credentials has been called a racist so it no longer has the negative meaning it once had. If somebody is calling you a racist, it might just mean that you are an independent thinker who is concerned about the future of your country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» A peculiar symmetry Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Hillary's Gift To Women
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fanny666 on May 13, 2008 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary's Gift To Women

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks for the link! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Hillary's Gift To Women Posted by: Rosasharn

Comments are closed-

The only country where being the smart (half) black guy is a detriment
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Kym525 on May 13, 2008 12:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rest of the world has got to be looking at the United States and wondering what kind of collective drugs we must be taking.

Only in this twilight zone mentality could a man raised by a single mom on food stamps who put himself through a presigious Ivy League university and became the first black on a law review who just paid off the mortgage on the house that he and his wife and two little girls now live in EVER be considered "an elitist". Since when has it ever been a detriment to be an intelligent and thoughful candidate with class?

Only when that intelligent, thoughtful and classy guy is (half) black. Ye gads! Hide yer daughters, the darkies are coming!

The truth is, it has been those same "hard-working white Americans" with their unfounded fears of miscegenation and their crutch of "god, guns and gays" that have given this country EIGHT years of GW and his failed domestic and foreign policies. These so-called "hard-working white Americans" seem to be more concerned with the statements of Jeremiah Wright and whether or not said (half) black candidate is patriotic enough rather than the state of our slowly crumbling infrastructure. No decent health care and our educational system is in the dumps, but the most important thing has GOT to be Michelle Obama's statement about being "proud to be an American for the first time in her life". These same so called "hard-working white Americans" (as if the only hard working Americans are WHITE) are losing their homes in record numbers, but are more concerned whether or not a candidates middle name means he's a Muslim.

So now, someone try and convince me this really doesn't boil down to race. I dare you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The censors have arrived Posted by: westomoon
» The lumpenproletariat Posted by: westomoon
» You are HILARIOUS! Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

It sure looks like a duck to me
[Report this comment]
Posted by: robbie.seal on May 13, 2008 1:53 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I sounded like a duck too...

I wonder if she can spin it to be a chicken...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

REACTION TO EVERY POST THUS FAR......
[Report this comment]
Posted by: wernersi on May 13, 2008 2:03 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gore Vidal told Amy Goodman last week he wishes American citizens were better informed about their country and other nations. (A most important book about our earlier catastrophe in Vietnam by Felix Greene was called "A Curtain of Ignorance.") I see the extremely diverse totality of our "culture" as "preadolescent." My audacity of hope is that more wisdom will come with age....long after this senior has skipped off this mortal coil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Bill's Flashback
[Report this comment]
Posted by: desidid on May 13, 2008 6:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is what Bill Clinton said when he was running for President. Seems he didn't like this type of campaigning when it was being used against him. Who's borrowing from the Republicans now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bill's Flashback Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Switch & Bait
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bessie on May 13, 2008 9:16 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama never belittled Hillary's role as First Lady .When she started to claim that she was some sort of Co-President, he questioned that. Last time I checked being a Co-President is not in our Constitution. Most of Hillary's claims proved to be untrue and trumped up - like in Bosnia. Face it, Hillary ran a terrible campaign & there's nothing sexist in stating that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

OSAMA HUSSIEN OBAMA SAY'S IT ALL
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mindtrvlr on May 14, 2008 1:08 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WHAT A BUNCH OF LOSERS

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No, but . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: No, but . . . Posted by: mindtrvlr

Comments are closed-

One thing's for sure
[Report this comment]
Posted by: talkville on May 14, 2008 4:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The upcoming election, regardless of which candidate wins, will certainly reflect the distance between the Actual and the Ideal with respect to the claims made as to 'civilization', 'culture' and 'advancement' within our social base. And not only among the Establishment but among those "ordinary" citizens which most of us fall into. I'm not optimistic.

Mrs Clinton seems to think that only 'white' individuals are worthy of including into concepts such as 'blue-collar', 'hard-working' and 'working class'; her conceptual frame seems to be shared by large sections in the Mainstream Media (and elsewhere).

Let's see what develops by November, 2008. I'm not optimistic as to what the results of this election will reveal. The "Social Mirror" so far does not present an altogether pretty picture.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Free Speech
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Reader11722 on May 14, 2008 12:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You don't have to vote for her but she has a right to say whatever she wants. This is all about the Free Speech. Let's not follow the gov't down the path of censorship. After all, censorship is becoming America's favorite past-time. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like America Deceived (book) from Amazon and shut down Ron Paul. Free Speech forever (even for Hillary).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Free Speech Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

You Morons:
[Report this comment]
Posted by: jvaljon1 on May 14, 2008 5:08 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's NOT BLACK AS AMERICANS RELATE TO "BLACK"--that is to say, his color derives from a Kenyan father. A father who was not two or three or ten generations or whatever, removed from Kenya--but rather one who was BORN in Kenya. So he's not just an elitist--he's masquerading as something he's not.

Look--my Dad was black. By skincolor I'm white. My mother was white. The vagaries of genetics being what they are, that's how I came out. That's by skincolor. My FATHER WAS ALGERIAN. Is that black? He sure was--yet he identified with Algerian Arabs. What Dad would say (if he were still among us) is something on the lines of: Black is as black does. (In my Dad's French accent that'd sound real funny, as if Daddy was talking about a coal chute or something).

I think from my perspective, that if Obama was, say, someone on the order of Julian Bond or some other elder statesman of the Democratic Party who happens to be black, we wouldn't be hearing all this. So my question is: why a 1-term Senator? Why now? Why challenge the otherwise nominee by default--wife of man who ran the most successful and popular Administration yet?

Hmmm. I smell a rat. A REPUBLICAN RAT. Anyone else here, smell the same?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I smell something, all right Posted by: xconservative
» I AGREE, TOTALLY Posted by: mindtrvlr
» Pot and Kettle Posted by: xconservative
» RE: Pot and Kettle Posted by: mindtrvlr
» Gee, what a clever rebuttal! Posted by: xconservative
» Try to keep up, darlin' Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Try to keep up, darlin' Posted by: mindtrvlr

Comments are closed-

THE MONEY BEHIND OBAMA IS A BIG PART REPUBLICAN. THEY ARE AGAIN PLAYING THE
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on May 14, 2008 10:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American people for fools. They played the American people for fools over Viet Nam. They played the American people for fools over Iraq. They believe that they can beat Obama. They don't think that they can beat HILLARY.

Worse yet, they think that they can pull the wool over a young man's eyes in case he wins. For the republican owned press Hillary needs to leave. They are doing a nightly drumbeat. Remember the press is owned by republicans. Do you really think you can trust them? Moreover, the advertisers that bring you the press are almost all republican. DO YOU THINK THAT THEY WILL PUT UP THEIR MONEY FOR SOMETHING THAT THEY DON'T LIKE?

The way you can tell that what I am saying is true is to follow the money. When Obama gets the nomination the money will suddenly dry up. It will all go to McCain. I think that McCain has a really good chance of winning. These guys have a lot at stake. I'm already taking bets with close friends on which states he will win. If anybody will give you long odds on McCain, its probably a good idea to take them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» He sure is... Posted by: westomoon
» GOOD COMMENT Posted by: mindtrvlr
» These are good posts! Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

voter profile
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Drclaw on May 15, 2008 3:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
white male, immigrant family (grandfather was a butcher, other worked in a factory), wanted to vote for Edwards, but shifted to HRC, couldn't do it despite (and to some extent because of) her history. Voted for Obama.

To all those who say Obama can't win so we should vote for HRC-whaddya gonna do now? You can fulfill your proficy by standing around on the sidelines, or you can do something that would have been unthinkable 50 years ago. Your call.

Many thanks to those in the AA community that tried to give us their perspective. Thanks to all who have faith that many (most, I hope) people are looking for the best candidate, not a skin color or chromosome.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bravo, Doctor! Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

NOTHING WOULD PLEASE ME MORE THAN FOR OBAMA TO BECOME
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on May 15, 2008 10:02 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
president of the United States and be the best president we have ever had. But then I voted for Hubert Humprey, George McGovern, Dukakas(sp), Al Gore, and John Kerry. The democratic party has made me a fairly practiced loser. My own feeling is/was that every one of these men would have been much better than what we had.

Most of the time when someone set out to explain why these guys didn't win, they said that they were too liberal. But that sounds like a republican argument to me. The democratic party has a way of nominating really good people that lose elections.

But then I really didn't think that John Kennedy could overcome his Catholicism. I voted for him, but I figured there were too many protestants, read Southern Baptists, that would vote against him. He was shot in the middle of Southern Baptist country. We will never know whether he would have made a good president. He didn't have enough time for us to really learn.

When enough prejudiced old men die, we can have a black president. It appears to me that the young men think enough old men have died. If he gets the nomination, I sure hope that they are right. It is probably true that the only way that you can plumb the depths of prejudice is to keep trying.

I don't think that our democracy can stand another republican era. German big business was afraid of the left. The German communist party took 280,000(recheck this number) votes in 1928. German big business put their money on Adolf. The first people into the concentration camps were not the Jews. It was the back bone of the German communist party. The Jews came last after the Communists, the insane, the gypsies, and the gays.

American big business is no smarter than German big business was in the later twenties. They will continue to support right wing tyranny. The spent the last 50 years railing about left wing tyranny. I'm afraid tyranny is tyranny where ever it comes from. Harry Truman had it right. The best solution is always more democracy.

My comment is that there is only one subject that you can't be radical on. That is democracy. If you guys out vote me, it is my responsibility to smile, and if necessary to kiss.............

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Are you kidding, pulling my leg, or just delusional?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: DRANNAN on May 16, 2008 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The blacks are playing the race card, not the Clintons. When around 90% of blacks vote for a black, that IS because of race. If 90% of whites were voting for Clinton, that would be because of race. Obama is getting a good share of white votes so blacks are playing the race card.

Hillary Clinton has suffered about 5 BILLION DOLLARS worth of negative "advertising" from the likes of you and other columnists, pundits, and the "media."

The Clintons have spent their life trying to help minorities. And, this is the thanks they get? It is enough to set race relations back 20 years.

One of the major reasons Hillary Clinton beat Obama by 41%, was NOT because West Virginians were "racist." It was because W.V. has only 8% blacks. Obama got 90% of their vote. Obama received a respectable number of white votes considering his inexperience. Also, West Virginias LIKED the gas tax suspension. A few dollars can make the difference between eating and not eating for some.

Obama won Mississippi and North Carolina because of a high black population. He will NOT carry Mississippi or North Carolina in the General Election.

Obama is likeable enough and he is talented, however, he is too green, too inexperienced, and 8 years too soon to be elected.

I have been a big supporter of the Clintons since they came on the scene, and I have not wavered in my support.

As a Democrat, I would choose Obama over McCain if that were the only choice.

I am sick and tired of being sick and tired after an election when the Democrats LOSE. That is why it is so IMPORTANT to nominate the BEST CANDIDATE to beat McCain. That nominee is Hillary Clinton, by far.

Hillary Clinton would beat the pulp out of McCain and Obama, sadly, will be defeated because It's About the Electoral College...Stupid!

It truly does come down to WHO can win most of the Swing States. Hillary Clinton can WIN most of those states and the General Election and Obama will LOSE most of them and the General Election.

The Democrats have gone from a sure winner (Hillary Clinton) to a sure loser (Obama.)

The latest poll data (~May 13) on www.pollster.com shows Obama would lose the following swing states AND the election--Florida, Ohio, Michigan, West Virginia, and Arkansas. At least 4 of these states MUST be won to win the Presidency.

The polls show Hillary Clinton would win Ohio, West Virginia, and Arkansas and is tied with McCain to win Florida (Obama is 8% BEHIND McCain). Clinton has an excellent chance of winning Florida and Obama has virtually no chance.

In Missouri, Hillary is 3% behind McCain and Obama is 10% behind McCain. Hillary Clinton has an excellent chance of carrying Missouri, Obama has no chance.

In Michigan, Obama and Clinton are tied and McCain is only about 1% ahead so Michigan is in play for both candidates.

Clinton is ahead of McCain in PA, another swing state, by 8%. Obama is ahead by 2%. Clinton looks like a sure winner in PA. Obama looks like a hopeful winner.

Go to www.thelectoralvote.com and you can calculate the electoral vote.

Just about any way you can figure it (based upon poll data), Clinton can reach 270 electoral votes and Obama cannot reach that magic number.

Be careful about what you wish for. If Obama gets the nomination, he will lose the election, and I will be back to being sick and tired of losing an election. It is almost enough to make me change parties.

The Super Delegates SHOULD be ACCOUNTABLE. IF they vote for a losing candidate, they should be BARRED FOREVER from ever being a Super Delegate. Maybe then, they will quit hoping and start thinking about WHO CAN WIN.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

We Know Hillary Now
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bessie on May 16, 2008 9:16 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who's kidding who now? I know that younger white girls don't like Hillary much for all the right reasons. That's the good news. I'd assume it also for all the younger women of color. That's also good news. Women, also, with any education or idea of what's going on aren't thrilled with Hillary. That's also good news. We've seen a really nasty campaign that might be described as being based solely on race but for most people it's been based on just hatred and tired old slogans. Time to move on - women and people of good faith just want something better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Why the Dems could lose
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bbfmail on May 17, 2008 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jewish World Review May 6, 2008

Why the Dems could lose

By Cokie and Steve Roberts

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com

Democrats seem intent on nominating Barack Obama, in the face of mounting evidence that Hillary Clinton would be the stronger candidate against John McCain in November. And they only have themselves to blame.

Yes, the Clinton camp made strategic blunders that allowed Obama to score heavily in Republican states where few Democrats vote. But the real culprit is the party's stupid, self-destructive nominating system, which has two major flaws.

First, it was designed to anoint a nominee by early February, far too early in the process. The result: Obama built up an insurmountable lead at a time when he was still largely unblemished, untested and unscrutinized. The past six weeks have brought tougher media coverage, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's tapes, the candidate's ill-considered comments about "bitter" voters and a wave of second thoughts among key groups like union members and white Catholics.

Second, the nominating system was completely incapable of reflecting these shifts. Not only were few states remaining on the calendar, the rules of proportional representation made it almost impossible for Clinton to catch up.

Since Feb. 19, seven states have voted. Clinton has won four — Pennsylvania, Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island —building up a popular-vote margin of 483,000. Yet her total gain in delegates was exactly five. In Texas, she won by more than 100,000 votes, but because of that state's ridiculous rules, she actually came out five delegates behind.

How can that outcome possibly be fair? How can it possibly benefit the party?

Wait, it gets worse. Obama built up sizable margins in small states that Clinton was foolish enough to concede. His delegate advantage in Idaho, Kansas and Louisiana — three states that will never vote Democratic — was a total of 38. By contrast, Clinton handily won three large swing states — Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Ohio. And yet, because of party rules, her combined marginal gain amounted to 28 delegates.

How can it make sense for Idaho, Kansas and Louisiana to have a bigger impact on choosing the Democratic nominee than Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Ohio? Add in the exclusion of Florida and Michigan, two crucial states that favor Clinton, and there's only one word for the Democrats' system: crazy. And Republicans are gleeful.

So why don't Democratic leaders and superdelegates face these facts and shift to Clinton? One reason is race. It's true, as Obama says, that being black in America has hardly been a political asset, given the fact that he's the only African-American in the U.S. Senate.

But at this time, in this party, being black is an enormous asset. Given America's long, torturous path toward racial justice, many Democrats simply cannot imagine denying the nomination to the first serious African-American candidate for president.

From a moral perspective, that's a noble judgment. From a political perspective, it could cost Democrats the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why the Dems could lose Posted by: desidid

Comments are closed-

Clinton on the downward spiral
[Report this comment]
Posted by: danahouston on May 17, 2008 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't believe the way that she has kept this line of attack alive. Bob is right. They don't know when and how to stop when they are down. The single-minded determination should give way to some decorum and decency at this time. I loved how she was poised to declare her victory in West Virginia and no one really cared! As a matter of fact she has been ignored and not even acknowledged as a player right now!!! She needs to get it together and slowly get out of the campaign. She can't say that she is defeated but it was hers to lose. And Bubba did not help!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

ht
[Report this comment]
Posted by: htowell on May 17, 2008 1:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr Herbert reminds me of Eugene Robinson---All Obama all the time---they have made sure that the Obamas cried racist for over a year.This family has had it---Obama will never get our votes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ht Posted by: Democritus
» RE: ht Posted by: desidid

Comments are closed-

Time to bury the hatchet
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Democritus on May 17, 2008 4:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I address my comments to fellow progressive Democrats. The rest of you can buzz off. I say it's time to quit criticizing Hillary and Bill and to get on with the job of beating John McCain in November.

It is obvious by now that Barack Obama is going to be our candidate, despite the tortured math that Terry McAuliffe is using to wrest the nomination away for Hillary.

So now is the time to come together and concentrate our energies to expose John McCain for the flip-flopping, Bush clone that he is.

I urge all Democrats to heed my words, or else suffer another undeserved defeat in the fall. If you want to see how bad it might get if we don't coalesce into one movement, I suggest that you tune in to www.democratswrite.com and follow the slightly disguised fictional satire, "The McPain Conspiracy." Each Wednesday a new episode will be featured, and the bickering between the Clinton and Obama camps might actually result in what this fictional account describes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

You Do Obama A Disservice
[Report this comment]
Posted by: elaine46 on May 17, 2008 9:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You do Obama a disservice with this tired old Clinton attack. Is Obama being racist by putting his upcoming voter registration drives mainly in the urban areas and concentrating on signing up AA voters? It's just a fact that she is winning (bitter)white, middle class voters and he is winning black voters. Do we have to erase the words white and black from the dictionary to make you happy? He's not going to win without converting a substantial number of those white middle class voters who cast their ballot for Hillary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Learn from History
[Report this comment]
Posted by: riotoustanpdx on May 18, 2008 10:04 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no doubt that Obama has an army of supporters. So did Julius Caesar.

Caesar campaigned against the Gauls in France so long that he became an Outsider to Rome. Then he returned.

He then campaigned against the corruption in the Roman Senate, and said that it had to change. He was the man to do that; he was the man of the people of Rome, who promised them Hope in a New Republic free from the corruption and inside favors of the Senate, who then ruled for the wealthy establishment only.

The people loved the idea of Caesar ruling Rome. They never asked how much power he would assume personally.

Now we have the Imperial President, and a Vice President with an unknown staff and unknown level of influence.

The Obama supporters, caught up in the minutiae of personality myths about Hillary Clinton, and to a large extent full of hatred for persons and ideas that they know little about, are eager to put Obama into "Rome" without knowing what he intends to do there. How does one man change the city, and the world, without assuming nearly absolute power?

There was another powerful orator who promised change and hope for his people in recent history. He promised that the underprivileged would be be made stronger, have a right to work, and have social and economic security. He was elected by his people, who failed to ask exactly how he would deliver these things to the people. He started a war five years later.

It was a very big war.

He also claimed that his people were oppressed, the victims of others who had taken their jobs, their lands, their rights in their own homeland. These he promised to restore to his people.

He started a very big war.

He turned on the people who brought him to power.

He demanded Justice, but made his own definition of the word.

He promised to nationalize corporations and share the profits with the workers; instead he allowed them to continue, increased their size, made a pact with the owners, and went outside the country for financial support to expand those companies into a war machine.

The people took him at his word; they believed that he was the answer to the corrupt practices of the past, their deliverer, their political messiah.

He promised Change. He gave his followers hope.

They believed him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Learn your History Posted by: fanny666
» RE: Learn from History Posted by: desidid

Comments are closed-

American Politics
[Report this comment]
Posted by: marizara on May 18, 2008 2:21 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An American Election: -- Where two parties hold barbecues, and each potential nominee is slowly roasted over a charcoal fire until he/she either splits, flips out, or dies. -- The two sole survivors then get to repeat the process, using the battle cry, 'There Can Be Only One', until there is only one person left standing. -- This, then, is determined to be strong enough to inherit the Kings crown, and take the throne of Presidency of the USA. -- Woe unto any who enter this trial with ordinary human weakness, for that one shall suffer as no other. -- All this with the entire planet watching!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Dr. JimboButch
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JimboButch on May 19, 2008 2:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I once thought that AlterNet and Mr. Herbert were fair players, but that AlterNet choose to reprint this piece of trash from 'The New York Times' makes me wish that AlterNet would just fade away. Mr. Herbert, whom I used to like, has now emerged as a champion spinner in the style of the Republicans, I've lost all respect for him and his writing. Both AlterNet and Herbert are Clinton bashers, big time. Perhaps it's just plain, bloody raw misogyny! I know you and he support Sen. Obama, but please, not by slander, smear, and smirch tactics spewed at Sen. Clinton and Bill Clinton as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

With Friends like these
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fratricide08 on May 12, 2008 2:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...who needs republicans. She was talking about a demographic and once again the quote is sliced and diced to make it look like race-baiting. I'm starting to wonder if the media and some Obama "supporters" are really just trying to sabotage his campaign. Painting the Clintons as racists and now as Mr. Herbert says, classless and graceless too are unforgivable sins. Wanna know why, Clinton supporters say no to Obama? One of the MAJOR reasons is this drivel.

What's more the author has apparently still not figured out the problem. Look at the exit polls and you'll see what the 90% AA vote is obscuring -- the party is divided by CLASS in EVERY CATEGORY -- white, asian, latino, gay, straight etc. Obama is the candidate of the rich/upper middle class whereas Clinton has the votes of the non-rich even when you adjust for race **and** education. AAs obscure this reality because they are almost unified in their support and we as a nation still see in terms of only black and white people.

Further, it does Clinton NO GOOD to race-bait and you have to have a special kind of hate in your heart, and to have taken a few bumps on your head, to believe it in the first place. The demographics have been clear throughout the race and haven't moved in ANY significant amount the entire campaign season. Obama's problem is a class based problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Frank J. Burris
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Moira61
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: mkdelta69
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Lauren
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: texshelters
» Tex! A warning Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Tex! A warning Posted by: beachpoet
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: mkdelta69
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: captain sassy
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: fratricide08
» Uh..excuse me Posted by: Moira61
» RE: Uh..excuse me Posted by: blackie4aces
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Quannah
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Lauren
» Do not apologize. Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Do not apologize. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Do not apologize. Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Do not apologize. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: hms2004
» Oh, tell it, Easy! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: But wait! There's more! Posted by: Longdream
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: jareilly
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: Lauren
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: ibolyap
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: daniel w vermillion
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: serioussomebody
» RE: With Friends like these Posted by: indepentent

Comments are closed-

..." The chickens, are...'a comin' "...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dave1616 on May 12, 2008 3:58 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
please see www.discussrace.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Blacks' Grotesque Insult To Hillary
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ot on May 12, 2008 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Clintons have always been staunch advocates of the Black community. That is why Blacks "have given so much support to both Bill and Hillary over the years". And, as further payback, Blacks are now displaying their inherent racism by turning their backs on their friends and voting for Obama just because he is (half) Black. The irony, of course, is that they are really only voting for a weak and effeminate Uncle Tom, pre-sold to special interests, who will crumble under the first serious pressures of a US presidency. If anyone has a right to be insulted it is Hillary at the turncoat tactics of Black voters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Michelle Obama's Thesis Posted by: Prairie Waif
» Reply to Mandy's Post Posted by: Prairie Waif
» Ted Sorensen writes his speeches. Posted by: sallythewally
» Is that all you have, Quannah? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» Proven a liar? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Proven a liar? Posted by: Longdream
» Who's lying Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Who's lying Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Who's lying Posted by: Quannah
» Weasel words Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Weasel words Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Except to say Posted by: Longdream
» ???? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Is that all you have, Quannah? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Is that all you have, Quannah? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» You nailed it! Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: Tsk, Tsk. Posted by: Longdream
» You flatter yourself Posted by: xconservative
» RE: Inherently racist??? Posted by: mattbrown46

Comments are closed-

Racist Americans
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Abushite on May 12, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why no classification of British Americans, French Americans etc ... etc..
Because the American Mindset has to classify every human in some format !!! What about American, or would that embarrass - when considering the only Americans that can be labeled American are NATIVE Americans - the rest are occupiers.

Barack Obama is more American than many that are busily applying labels.

Mrs Clinton is an American, who is a proven lier - Kosovo , A thief - taking property from the Whitehouse, Corrupt - the cattle futures, WhiteWaters, Acceptance of gross immorality
in her home.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» African-Irish-American! Posted by: foreverhope
» RE: African-Irish-American! Posted by: kimbari
» Proud Afro-Celtic-American Posted by: Kym525
» RE: acist Americans Posted by: Lauren
» RE: acist Americans Posted by: Paul1939
» RE: acist Americans Posted by: Paul1939

Comments are closed-

Antiquated Demographics & Stratedgies are showing
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 12, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just because you say it - DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE!
Between Hillary and the Media, I'm Not sure who has been a HERMIT longer.
Their suppositions to the Demographic and 'Pulse of America' confirms they are Liars and Delusional.How long has it been sinc eany of them have stepped out of their Ivory fortress'?
When's the last time they spoke to a Sociologist, and Anthrologist a Historian who is Not a Corp Spinner, A "Yes Man/Madame" who will say anything tokeep their jobs regardless of Reality. Ignorance and arrogance is not their only Archilles Heel- but the mind numbing effects of their own propaganda and silencing of the Truth and elnlightened Dissent.AmericaNs stopped buying 'they hate US for Our Freedoms' when we saw what th etargets were on 9/11. It was Not US,but THEM who were attacked (we were the innocent victims they had been using as Human shields for Decades), Most of US Never bought into their 'blame the Vicitms' Deflection of Guilt Techniques- But we were Silenced, Gagged and Shackled and 'Waterboarded ' when we could Send out smoke signals to our fellow citizens regarding the LIES!Called 'Conspiracy Theorist Crazies', 'Traitors' ,'Cowards', 'UNAMERICAN'. It is not the 'Terrorist' who Hate Americans Freedoms, Rights and progresive Philosphies it it those who provoked the atttacks on 9/11 through their immoral and Unethical global Business Practices.They have proven their agenda and Goals since 9/11 to bring Down everything that We Stand For- gutted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Pissed on the Spirit and guiding Force behind The Declaration of Independence "WE THE PEOPLE"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hard to read Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: Hard to read Posted by: writer7
» RE: Hard to read Posted by: Prairie Waif
» Communication as a goal Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Communication as a goal Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Can Somebody Tell Me What the Clintons Have Ever Done for African-Americans??
[Report this comment]
Posted by: redbird30328 on May 12, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The mythology and reality are wildly divergent. Other than (or perhaps including) attending some funerals, I don't see anything other than consistent exploitation of a demographic group for political advantage. Oh, I forgot, Bill saw films of MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech a few times.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That's easy Posted by: Iconoclast421
» What, you want facts or something! Posted by: texshelters

Comments are closed-

Personally . . .
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Scientz on May 12, 2008 5:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . I've grown tired of Manichean American racism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Strange ratings Posted by: westomoon
» Yup, that's manichean too Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Gemajabe
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gemajabe on May 12, 2008 5:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Herbert-You have been pumping up Obama since the beginning, not because he is the most progressive candidate (Kucinich and Edwards were better), but I would suspect because he is half Black. This is understandable. What is not understandable is your inability to see the entrenched misogany in this society. I have been voting for President since 1960. I have always had the choice between two males. Do you think this is an accident? When the history of this primary, when a competent, experienced woman had a real shot at the White House, it will be about sexism, not racism. Journalists like you insult and demonize Hillary Clinton and would do so to any woman, because you would prefer a male. Very sad, very demoralizing for women like me who have worked so hard for a better world for women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: Quannah
» Save the drama for your Mama.... Posted by: Fencerider
» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: Addressing Marion Berry Posted by: desidid
» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Gemajabe Posted by: zeek2
» I want a woman President too Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

The syntax is really troublesome.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on May 12, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, I have a complaint about the article. Exactly half of it is a diatribe against the Clintons, a gratuitous collection of old Republican talking points.

But the phrase Senator Clinton used, "...working, hard-working Americans, white Americans..." seems to stress an association between "hard working", "white" and "American." Obviously she is pandering to working whites. It also seems to be an oblique shot at Obama supporters who are depicted in the media as blacks and elites.

Her comment seems to define Obama supporters as not hard working, not white, and/or not American.

Also troubling is that I haven't seen Senator Clinton apologize for, or even explain the comment, which really should have happened the moment she realized what had come out of her mouth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» She doesn't apologize Posted by: westomoon
» RE: She doesn't apologize Posted by: Lauren
» RE: She doesn't apologize Posted by: Longdream
» Whether intentional or not Posted by: texshelters

Comments are closed-

Mr. Herbert is correct.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Quannah on May 12, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And we now see what the Clintons' "win-at-all-costs" strategy has gotten them - it's cost Hillary the nomination. People can blame Obama for her loss (he has received more votes and more delegates, after all!) or blame black voters (last time I checked, aren't we all supposed to be free to vote our conscience?) but they don't place the blame where it should lie: squarely with the Clinton's themselves.

Both Bill and Hillary have played the race card in this primary. They have both used "code language" to urge whites to vote for them, not Obama. They have exploited the racial divide in this country in order to further separate the party into color-coded factions, which is absolutely despicable. Dirty tricks even the Republics haven't yet tried (but I'm sure they will now, seeing that Hillary did it... what a precedent to set, huh?)

It was the Clinton's who decided to take this to the gutter, and it's there they should rightfully finish this whole mess. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Can I get an "Amen"! Posted by: Fencerider
» Amen! Posted by: texshelters
» RE: Mr. Herbert is correct. Posted by: ConsiderChange

Comments are closed-

Ruthless, Race-Carding Hillary - reposting
[Report this comment]
Posted by: foreverhope on May 12, 2008 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Frank Rich: Ruthless, Race-Carding Hillary
By Mark Finkelstein | February 10, 2008 - 08:05 ET
[A] synthetic product leeched of most human qualities. -- Frank Rich, on how Hillary Clinton is being marketed, Feb. 10, 2008.

If Frank Rich is the voice of elite liberal opinion, Hillary Clinton is in deep, deep trouble. How many folks on the Upper West Side and reasonable facsimiles thereof from Boston to Madison to LA will be opening their hearts -- or credit cards -- to Hillary after reading Rich's stunning indictment of Clinton and her campaign this morning?

The jumping-off point for Rich's column is the live prime-time special the night before Super Tuesday that the Clinton campaign conducted. Flashing his theater-critic roots, Rich panned it as a "boring" "pseudo-event," noting that "some in attendance appeared to trance out." But if the staging was bad, the substance was much, much worse in Rich's view. For he claims that it reflected nothing less than Clinton playing from a "thick deck of race cards."

Writes Rich [emphasis added]:

In its carefully calibrated cross section of geographically and demographically diverse cast members — young, old, one gay man, one vet, two union members — African-Americans were reduced to also-rans. One black woman, the former TV correspondent Carole Simpson, was given the servile role of the meeting’s nominal moderator, Ed McMahon to Mrs. Clinton’s top banana. Scattered black faces could be seen in the audience. But in the entire televised hour, there was not a single African-American questioner, whether to toss a softball or ask about the Clintons’ own recent misadventures in racial politics.

The Clinton camp does not leave such matters to chance. This decision was a cold, political cost-benefit calculus. In October, seven months after the two candidates’ dueling church perorations in Selma, USA Today found Hillary Clinton leading Mr. Obama among African-American Democrats by a margin of 62 percent to 34 percent. But once black voters met Mr. Obama and started to gravitate toward him, Bill Clinton and the campaign’s other surrogates stopped caring about what African-Americans thought.

I must say, the fact that the tightly-scripted Clinton campaign didn't permit a single question from a black viewer during an hour-long event is nothing short of shocking.

[T]his show was a dramatic encapsulation of how a once-invincible candidate ended up in a dead heat, crippled by poll-tested corporate packaging that markets her as a synthetic product leeched of most human qualities.

Less than two weeks ago she was airlifted into her own, less effective version of “Mission Accomplished.” Instead of declaring faux victory in Iraq, she starred in a made-for-television rally declaring faux victory in a Florida primary that was held in defiance of party rules, involved no campaigning and awarded no delegates. As Andrea Mitchell of NBC News said, it was “the Potemkin village of victory celebrations.”

The Clinton campaign might be an imploding Potemkin village itself were it not for the fungible profits from Bill Clinton’s murky post-presidency business deals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Longdream
» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Quannah
» RE: ALL TOGETHER NOW Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE:HMMMMPH! Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

Hard to Admit: The US Is Still a Racist Society
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ChicagoPaul on May 12, 2008 6:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Truth in Packaging Here: Old (Retired), Hard-Working, Middle Class, and White. I happen to be from Illinois and have been an Obama support from his State Senator days.

Senator Clinton is not necessarily a racist. She is, however, pandering to (not so) latent racist tendencies, not just in West Virginia or in the South, but in the entire United States.

She is pandering. It's what politicians do. Senator Obama has been caught pandering, too.

The bigger problem, which is shamefully not addressed in this forum or in most places today, is that we are still a racist society. I'll say it again: We have made very little progress in the 232 years since the concept of "all men (people) are created equal" was first penned. We can do better than we have. That both Clinton and Obama have gotten as far as they have is a testament to the fact that we are working on the problem.

However, since we are still asking the questions "Is the US ready for a black president?" or "Is the US ready for a woman president?" you can only deduce that we are not only still a racist society, but also a sexist society.

Senator Obama points out that we are not, as yet, a Perfect Union. Dr. King's dream of judging a person by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin is still a dream.

That's why Senator Clinton's "pander" is so destructive: It is not helpful in constructing a more perfect union and it damages the dream.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hold on there C.Paul... Posted by: ConsiderChange

Comments are closed-

Can we end the flag waving?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: LeslieGem on May 12, 2008 6:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I think is ridiculous is how the politicians fall all over themselves to call the folks living in rural areas "hard working" "patriotic" etc. etc. Because that's who Hilary was talking about -- white, rural, probably working class or lower middle class voters. Of course they are hard working -- we all are! What about the folks who live in urban areas? Aren't we hard working? A foreigner listening to all of this would think that the only people who work for a living or have any love for this country are the folks out in the country and us urban people sit around all day eating bon-bons and spitting on the flag! It’s patronizing to people in rural areas and insulting to those in urban ones.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe not racist.... Posted by: Fencerider
» RE: Can we end the flag waving? Posted by: ChicagoPaul
» Ah, you "effete" city slickers! Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

McCain for president, Hillary for VP, and Liebermann for SS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Gregory Kruse on May 12, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fate can be generous and fate can be cruel. Hillary became a Democrat because she wanted to join Bill's team. She is still really a Republican. The only thing that could redeem her in the eyes of Democrats is to come out of the closet and run as McCain's mate. All would be forgiven, and everyone would breathe a sigh of relief. The media would have something to chew on for months even after the election, win or lose. She is the only one who can save the Republicans from oblivion, so as a matter of necessity, they would accept her with open arms. She would bring many older white women and working class white people into the Republican party. This is too good a scenario to not happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Are We Above Reproach?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JohnJlws on May 12, 2008 6:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The question should not be “why did he stay?” but “why didn’t we listen?”
When “The Reverend” damned our nation we should have analyzed the reason behind his condemnation the same way we should evaluate Farrakhan’s ideas, or wondered when Muhammed Ali said "I got nothin' against the North Vietnamese. They never called me 'nigger.’” Instead the MSM reported only “I got nothin’ against the North Vietnamese” and Ali was lynched for his objection to a war that never should have been authorized and never should have been waged. In full context Ali’s words were no less a stinging indictment of the fact we have failed to include all our population in this “great” experiment in democracy than are Farrakhan’s or “The Reverend’s.”

Instead of serious debate we have weeks of sound bites of “The Reverend” and questioning “what does this mean about this man running for president?” When in fact many weren’t questioning anything, as we so often do, but simply measuring one candidate by a bar set at a different level than the one set for all others and justifying that little inner voice that tells us we should “cross the street as the black man’s coming.” We should instead, and automatically, have viewed an entire life and embraced someone who has the courage to not only listen to contrary opinion, but stand up and say I will not disown this man with ideas I don’t agree with. I have not, in 50 years, seen this sort of courage in politics. We should instead be questioning those who cannot listen to diverse or contrary opinion as the primary example of this behavior sits in the White House and the other candidates running seem to have the same affliction.

Groups like the Swift Boat Clowns for Half-Truth and Innuendo will scare the living daylights out of white America and when they’re done not only will we see a most qualified candidate completely vilified, we’ll once again put the negro in his place and there will be only the slightest whimper of public outcry as we mourn the death yet again of the vision embodied in that single clause in our Declaration.

I cannot, even in my wee little brain, answer simple questions like why is there a different penalty for crack cocaine versus powder cocaine? This question should haunt everyone who thinks because it points to the absolute disparity that exists in a system that we tout as “blind” and yet she provides limited justice to those people of color who have a greater tendency to be involved in crack cocaine. And, if she’s not blind to the simple things, is she anymore sightless to the bigger picture?

We get excited that “he can’t capture the white vote” when the bigger concern isn’t that “she’s lost virtually the entire black vote,” but why is this even a topic of discussion? Why in 2008 are we still thinking a black candidate will get the black vote, a woman will get the female vote and McCain will get votes because people are stupid (not really, but I cannot figure out why anyone wants to continue the policies of the last 8 years and that is McCain)?

So when the Clintons attempt to “Willie Horton” Barack, I am not surprised. Unfortunately I am not surprised when this sort of drivel finds significant traction, when our mass media continue to report “this story,” and when we continue to listen to suggestions that skills sets and expertise are somehow associated with age, sex, or race. “All men [and women] are created equal” is, and always has been, a dream, but we’ve only come a certain distance based on our perception in our quest of this goal and we should not be too self-congratulatory of our progress because for those of us walking in white shoes the strides can seem tremendous, but for many others we have yet to crawl—we’ll see this election if we’re finally able to take a tenuous step.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Are We Above Reproach? Posted by: dgleason
» RE: Are We Above Reproach? Posted by: ibolyap

Comments are closed-

She's an ungainly speaker who was paraphrasing poll data.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ABetterFuture on May 12, 2008 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real question to her critics on this particular oh-so-heinous-reality-based-slur is which is more offensive--polling data or Clinton herself? You folks do know that they take polling data, and much of it is demographically based?

FYI, you don't have to be a racist to vote for Clinton, and you don't have to be a mysogynist to vote for Obama.

Go figure, lol, "progressively"!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Relevance please?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JohnJlws on May 12, 2008 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sorry, but I'm struggling to see the relevance between your post and the one you're responding to. That said I'm not sure why in these discussions we stoop to name calling and disrespect. "nobama,” “empty suit,” or "Billary" or "McBush.” I think one can make their arguments more cogent by dropping the name-calling and simply saying things like "I don't believe Obama has the depth of experience we need although he is a great orator," or "I believe Clinton has demonstrated she doesn't have the judgment to lead simply with her tragically poor decision on Iraq which has cost this nation so dearly," or "McCain will continue the disastrous policies of the preceding administration as he has already embraced them and I simply cannot support this direction."

An intelligent conversation I believe demands we respect not only the candidates, but their supporters (each other). As a person who "drank the Kool-aid" early on (and often), who has gotten over his fear of "HUSSEIN!!!" and the "Muslim conspiracy" and has worked through all the comments suggesting I somehow must have Velcro-strapped shoes because I’m not smart enough to tie a shoelace and therefore probably lack the cognitive ability to do even rudimentary analysis, I would welcome a debate of my choice, but I'm not going to condemn the others through name calling. I support Barack not because I fail to see value in Clinton (she brings a tremendous dynamic to this debate and I respect her patriotism and her service), but because I see far more possibility and hope in his vision and therefore our future. (Oh, by the way, I didn’t give you the rating, but I probably would put a 2 or 3 on yours simply because I couldn’t see the relevance to the original post.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

SPEAKING OF CHICKENS
[Report this comment]
Posted by: master09 on May 12, 2008 9:17 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America has lied to itself for a very long time and is failing as we speak. This country must realize that the world has changed and is changing everyday and what is it that we are talking about; Whites, Blacks Racist, Hillary, Bill, and all the other bullshit that does not mean a thing to the rest of the world. Here’s what about to happen, the only person that stands between Obama and presidency is Hillary Clinton; the establishment already know this(so call Republicans and Democrats)it is apparent that he will be elected and they would have to give up all the secrets and believe me America and its government have some secrets; they are not so worried about Obama but Michelle is another matter, they are not too certain about her, so impeachment is on the table or some other bullshit that they would use to get rid of him; oh! make no mistake they would/will impeach him. I shouldn’t have to remind anyone why they tried to impeach Clinton but would not impeach a crook that was on the verge of destroying the whole dam country. There have been a lot of lies told and lot of secrets kept, I believe the Jig is up,THE CHICKENS ARE HOME.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Liam
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Liam on May 12, 2008 9:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From "day one" of her campaign Billery Clinton has just added to the reasons she should not be president or even considered for president.

I admit it...I didn't like Bill - never liked her..but we Clinton detractors could not even imagine the tasteless, venal classless behavior the two of them have demonstrated.

Bubba Bill destroy 50% of the Democratic Party in 8 years...Hillary would finish it off! As a retired union official it is beyond me why any worker (man, woman, any race, etc) would support someone so ego driven and self centered. Just unbelievable she has any labor support! Go Obama!!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liam Posted by: ConsiderChange
» Link to Hillary's Campaign Website Posted by: Prairie Waif

Comments are closed-

The Racist, Warmongering Democratic Party
[Report this comment]
Posted by: shinseiji on May 12, 2008 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article is relevant to the tenor of the entire primary campaign season. The real political nature of the Democratic Party has been expose for all but the usual self-deluded leftists, liberals and progressives. This nature is not restricted to this or that individual, but permeates the entire Party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

"We have met the enemy and it is us"....Pogo
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HomerScarborough on May 12, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why are we spending so much time demonizing Hillary when if it were another black man, nothing would be said other than it was politics and the loser was entitled to fight as long as they wanted. "It ain't over until the fat lady sings." The fat lady does not sing until the nominee is selected at the National convention.

It is interesting (and tragic) to watch as we set ourselves up to see John McCain elected by the largest majority since Johnson defeated Goldwater. This is not because of Hillary, it is because we have cooperated with the Republicans in getting nominated a man that cannot be elected in 2008, to run against their nominee. The result will be the opportunity to watch as John McCain is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. Bummer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yes, indeed! Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

There is only one Race..The Human Race..
[Report this comment]
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on May 12, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until the pundits start to teach people that we are 99.6% genetically identical to chimpanzees and so there is only a .4% differential between we so called humans and Chimpanzees which means any slight difference between us is scientifically immeasurable and that there are no different races only one race the Human Race nothing will ever change..

Bob and we've met, do you think you are a different Race from me an Italian American so called, do you believe you're a different Race from me..or someone from China or a Hispanic well I got news for you brother you ain't, you and I and YO Yo Ma and Tiger Woods and Osama bin-Laden and George Bush, Michael Jordan and Paul Simon are all the same Race...like it or not..?

It's The 21st Century and there is only one Race there are no different Human Races that is a scientific fact..!

Only The Human Race, as F^cked up as we all are we are all the same Race..Homo Sapien..Human only one race, The Human Race..

Get it..?

Good..!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Hmmm - Ver-r-r- y Interesting ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Lyrren54 on May 12, 2008 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been reading the comments on this article with interest, and it's quite telling, the sheer number of people who are buying into the BS about the African American voting block backing Obama without question because of his race, as well as the BS about the Clintons' racially divisive comments and obvious appeals to the alleged latent racism of white, blue collar/working-class voting block.

Rather than jump on the 'betrayal' bandwagon, I had hoped that white voters would be as INCENSED as many of us in the African American community are, rather than buy into the noise. Tsk-tsk.

I'm one of those votng African Americans you all are denigrating, and I'll have you know that I have supported the Clintons politically from the time he was governor of Arkansas, through Hilary's election and tenure as the junior Senator from New York, just as everyone I know with similar political views in every community I've lived in over that period - whether black, white, red, hispanic, or pink with polkadots.

And UNTIL she started using racial code words and lying, I supported Hilary whole-heartedly - our community supported her. We are NOW supporting OBAMA, not because he's black or half-black, or whatever, but because it is apparent that he is going to be the nominee and Mrs Clinton has unequivocally shown herself to be without any standards as to how low she will sink to get what she wants.

I'm very politically active, so perhaps can speak with some authority to what the African American community has been thinking, and reports to the contrary, African American support of Obama's candidacy was not at 90% until it became apparent that he was out-polling Mrs. Clinton, and not until she started pulling out every trick in the book, including the old 'race-bait-and-switch' tactics that have served the Republican party so well in years past.

I won't support anyone who thinks I am so stupid as to vote based on race, nor would I support anyone who thinks my white neighbors and friends are just as stupid.

She cut her own throat. The African American community has not betrayed her, she shot herself in the foot, and is apparently too stupid to stop.

I've given this woman every bit of funding and support I could throw behind her over the years, just as I have done for her husband, and she has shat upon me and mine.

At this point, I'd support Rin-Tin-Tin if he were running against her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» BEAUTIFUL post! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Hmmm - Ver-r-r- y Interesting ... Posted by: photon's feather
» Oh Please Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: margwa
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: margwa
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: desidid
» RE: Oh Please Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Hmmm - Ver-r-r- y Interesting ... Posted by: ConsiderChange

Comments are closed-

Winning...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bluepilgrim on May 12, 2008 10:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's all about winning. I doubt Hillary is (much of) a racist, but she plays one on TV. She will play anything if she thinks it will help her win.

That much of what she has played has helped her lose, however, speaks to her incompetence, as well as to her personal integrity. If she thinks 'obliterate Iran' will sell, then she will say that, and if she is elected and it helps her get re-elected, or gain more power, she will do it too. It's like the amoral corporate networks: say or do anything as long as it sells. That's what politics has been about these past years: winning, power, and greed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Winning... Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

dangergirl
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dangergirl on May 12, 2008 10:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now I may be mistaken; it happened once, but I seem to recall that the highly circulated "news" regarding stolen furniture and the supposed "trashed" condition of the White House was actually fabricated misinformation. Courtesy of the faux journalists found mostly on TV. Of course, the news stories correcting the lies weren't as widely broadcast nor near oft-repeated. Go figure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The re-emergence of Race
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Spot on May 12, 2008 10:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have you noticed what this clinton/obama campaign has done to us? we are all, after decades of believing the race card played out, again identifying ourselves to our communities primarily as a member of a race.

The internet is the only place where we can meet both anonymously and face to face, yet we pollute it by bringing in excess baggage, the politics of race.

does anyone believe that the color of a person's skin will determine the quality of their ideas? will it give us insight into truth? no. it can only shade their experience.

I am not advocating an ignorance of race; it has historically been, and i believe that this campaign shows it continues to be, an important distinction people at large make between them. what i advocate is a post-racism philosophy. it must not be the basis of our relations, but it will remain a portion of them.

when we talk about race, we unavoidably become entangled in the histories of the civil rights movement, black nationalism, and other cultures that many whites are unfamiliar (and frankly uncomfortable) with.

So what do we do?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: desidid
» RE: desidid Posted by: westomoon
» RE: westomoon Posted by: desidid
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: Longdream
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: desidid
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: Longdream
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: westomoon
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: Longdream
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: desidid
» RE: The re-emergence of Race Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Like Lyrren54...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Kym525 on May 12, 2008 10:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I too am an Obama supporter who just so happens to be black and female. Many of you know me and some of us have crossed words before so you know I can easily stand my ground as to WHY I am supporting him, and you all know I have NEVER mentioned his skin color being a reason.

I have ceased to be appalled at the level of ignorance I find in such a liberal site as alternet. The fact is I have seen more virulent racism expressed by so many so-called "liberals" in this forum that would make the losers who run Stormfront.org jealous and then wonder where most of you have been all this time. The difference between my so-called "liberal" bretheren and the Klan is becoming marginal everyday. At least those in the Klan, however heinous their beliefs, are at least a damn sight more honest. I can live with that.

I used to have all the respect in the world for Hilary Clinton (and even for Bill even though he was a total coward when it came to Lani Guinier and Jocelyn Elders), but it's pretty much been toast since she allied herself with Bush the warmonger and has been steadily going downhill. The thing is, Hilary is a smart woman and she had to have known her statements about "hard-working, white Americans" was designed to play into the hands of the bigot contingent who would rather take themselves and their families to hell than even vote for a black man who does share a great deal of their history. Her words were a bitter reminder that in the eyes of way too many whites, black folks don't work (an irony that since it was our ancestors brought over in tiny cargo holds to pick YOUR fucking cotton because well, your ancestors were obviously too lazy), and in spite of having built this country, fought and died for this country, are still not thought of as AMERICANS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Like Lyrren54... Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Like Lyrren54... Posted by: Kym525
» You say things like that Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: *Psssst!* Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

Hypocricy knows no bounds
[Report this comment]
Posted by: dayahka on May 12, 2008 11:05 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clinton spoke the truth, whether we like it or not. America is a racist society, Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and others notwithstanding. The "whites" are putting up a stand. The standard in American presidential politics has always been--white, male. White female is pushing it. Black is way beyond the line. It might be nice to try to wish and imagine our way to a truly pluralistic society beyond race, but it ain't going to happen so long as you have West Virginia. You are right that Clinton has no class and is the epitome of crass ambition, but who's become president who wasn't?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Some of them may be like me Posted by: xconservative
» RE: REPUGS? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Hypocricy knows no bounds Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

The Clintons
[Report this comment]
Posted by: estherme on May 12, 2008 11:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I voted for Clinton twice, but today I woudn't have after finding information my research has brought! See www.truestoriesvideoblog.info (telling the truth in universal deceit) See this documented video on what hell the Clintons did in Arkansas when he was governor. The press there kept all info. secret. See this "Clinton Chronicles" video. While on the site check out the videos on the Bush family's connection to Hitler & Nazi's. Then see the video on how the Federal Reserve started & the corrupt things they did & are still doing. This is one website of many with reliable information. People need to do more research on our history, gov't & politicians and less time watching the puff news of "American Idol!"
There is no excuse anymore, now that we have the internet. By the way, that's the next target of our corrupt gov't & corporations!They don't want an open internet. They want to control it as they do TV news & newspapers! When we finally have a Fascist nation, the only thing you will be able to do is to watch "American Idol." That may be okay with the fans, but not okay with Americans who believe in our Constitution!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Yes, America is largely racist
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bluepilgrim on May 12, 2008 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but I suspect there is more here, once we get past skin tones.

Blacks tend to be poorer, have less education, and otherwise get the short end of the stick -- tend to form much of the 'undeclass'. As such they are more sensitive to economic *class differences* in the country, and the propaganda of the ruling class (the pro-empire and pro-corporate stuff). In short, Blacks are more likely to see through the scams and jive of the economic and political elites. Black vs white often serves as a placeholder for the class warfare which has been going on almost forever in this country.

What about New Orleans? Were the people abandoned because they were Black or poor, or both? What about the huge disparity in the rate of incarceration? Black, poor, or both? It's often hard to tell the difference.

Clinton talks about being for the people, but it was Obama who worked for the poor/Black people in Chicago, and I see that as an important difference between them. I see Clinton as now being more on the side of the money and political elite than Obama is.

I see this as part of the class warfare the elite has waged on the working poor, and on the middle class who are fast becoming poor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Specifics, please... Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

There was a time
[Report this comment]
Posted by: willymack on May 12, 2008 11:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I thought: Hoo, boy; have the Dems got it made! Two great candidates, the polar opposites of bushco, both truly educated and INTELLIGENT, unlike the zero disgracing the office of President, and each in his or her way, finally establishing a long delayed breakthrough in American politics. What could possibly go wrong with this? Ha! Stupid question as it turns out. Through the sheer arrogance and obstinate ignorance of the facts, Ms Clinton has made it possible for four more years of our history's worst nightmare to occur in the person of insane John McCain. What was to be a resounding refutation of the runious neocon domination of our society has turned into a pointless free-for-all, which may well end in a defeat for the Democrats in November, and for us all, as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Hillary is not a racist.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HughScott on May 12, 2008 11:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Her pathetic political pandering aside, I don't believe Senator Clinton is prejudiced against black people. But for sure, she's an elitist.

By definition, elitism means "the belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources."

Hillary believes she should be president because of her eight-year residence in the White House where she rubbed elbows with America's power elite and fellow multi-millionaires.

To avoid being labeled a privileged member of uppercrust society, she used Karl Rove's playbook and accused Obama of being an elitist which, of course, is patently absurd.

That's something else I can't stand about Mrs. Sniper Fire -- her unmitigated arrogance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hillary is not a racist. Posted by: Digital Gentleman
» RE: Hillary is not a racist. Posted by: ConsiderChange
» RE: Hillary is not a racist. Posted by: Democritus

Comments are closed-

Follow the Money
[Report this comment]
Posted by: thehousedog on May 12, 2008 12:34 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about this as a way to measure, instead of race or votes? Money!

Hillary has raised lots of money - and even with all the supposed support from everybody who she thinks supports her - she is in debt to the tune of nearly $20Million.

Obama has raised lots of money - and kept it all - effectively showing that he knows how to (1) manage a campaign; and (2) knows how to be a fiscally prudent manager.

That he got more votes and delegates along the way is gravy. He's got the money and she does not.

Do you support Hillary for whatever reason? Did you put your money where you mouth is?

Do you support Obama for whatever reason?
Did you put your money where you mouth is?

Sad - but money makes the difference this time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Works for me! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Follow the Money Posted by: Lauren
» More delegates? Posted by: sallythewally

Comments are closed-

Why She Intends to Wreck Obama's Chances
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cellis56 on May 12, 2008 1:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is obvious that Clinton doesn't care that she has already lost the nomination. She continues to smear Obama because she wants McCain to win the presidency. Why? Because he will either f**k it up royally (likely) and/or die in office. In any event, she's looking to re-start her candidacy in 2012 when (thanks to her) Obama would conceivably be just another also ran. She could care less about the trashing of the Constitution (something she voted for in the form of the Patriot Act), the corruption of George Bush's presidency (did she vote to impeach the SOB?), the money grabbers at Halliburton, Bechtel, etc. (she's one too), and as for her concern for the poor--that canard is so pathetic it doesn't even deserve a response. But take this one: She and Bill dismantled welfare as we know it and they were busy working out a scheme to privatize Social Security when Bill was caught with his pants down. They have their hearts set on gutting the treasury (or what Dubya has left in it) and that's why she shed a tear. Obama--the nerve of that "boy"--makes it s hard for her and she's entitled! Entitled, I tell you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» If Obama loses the GE Posted by: eeezzz
» RE: If Obama loses the GE Posted by: Longdream
» It's so convenient Posted by: Left of center

Comments are closed-

Possibly the best thing ever to happen on Alternet!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: jwhitneywise on May 12, 2008 1:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love this. Offering constructive criticism on how we might improve our discourse! This fostering of growth and cooperation is what Alternet should be promoting all of the time, not the argumentativeness and name-calling among those who can't agree who is more liberal and which candidate is worse...and have you ever noticed that those are the posters with the worst grammar? I'm personally inspired to start editing posts and I urge other readers to do so as well!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Actual source material?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Phenix on May 12, 2008 3:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I need to actually hear this quote to believe it. I take any and everything from the New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post and well you get the picture with a grain of salt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You can hear it and see it... Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Actual source material? Posted by: desidid

Comments are closed-

The Clintons have no CLASS???
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ky Lake Dave on May 12, 2008 3:56 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are the dumb-ass Democrats just figuring that out? Did the Democratic blindfold to taste, class and morals just fall off? Could it be that the Vast Right Conspirators had it right all along? AND… if they were right then … could be they are right about Obama NOW!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Troll Central
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Rosasharn on May 12, 2008 5:41 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rabid trolls are taking over this site. Is this Limbaugh strategy? Whatever it is, it's becoming extremely difficult to find anything that isn't coated in this 'hate Hillary' slime. I do happen to remember the Clinton years, which were dominated by peace and prosperity, albeit infused with the endless witch hunting. In fact, all these so called democrats on this site sure sound an awful lot like those old voices, filled with hate for the Clinton charisma. I, personally, am very impressed with Hillary's ability to stand tall throughout this entire campaign. She won't cave and 'you' can't handle a woman of this caliber. She's as tough as nails, and the last time I looked, that's what we need in a leader. Just like FDR, Hillary will make her grand achievements IN OFFICE. And won't it be great to have Obama sitting in the office next door, the vice-president's office.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Troll Central Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Troll Central Posted by: Quannah
» Such Clouded Memories Posted by: Rosasharn
» RE: Such Clouded Memories Posted by: xconservative
» A progressive troll on a progressive site? Posted by: photon's feather

Comments are closed-

A thought
[Report this comment]
Posted by: SOWILO on May 12, 2008 5:45 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know, I'm getting a bit tired about hearing how racist America is. I know we have a checkered past. But what country doesn't. White countries have no monopoly on genocide and slavery. Look at the history of many countries in Africa for instance.

Here in Los Angeles, we have a pretty diverse community with Latinos holding high public office. We have, for the most part, many different cultures working side by side. Most of the racism here is not white on black or white on Latino, but really vicious racism between blacks and Latinos. Whites aren't even in the picture in most regards since we are a minority here. There are many minority business owners. My boss is an African American for a very successful design studio.

I'm not denying racism exists, but if you look to the EU, which is more progressive than the U.S. in some regards, ask yourself how far a black man would get in a campaign for the presidency of any European country or a Prime Minister's position.

This shrill "racist America" talk is getting rather tedious. It is reinforcing victim attitudes among minorities and reactionary sentiments amongst working-class whites that are not helpful.

Just my two cents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Your two cents just lost value Posted by: photon's feather
» Racism against Obama Posted by: fanny666

Comments are closed-

larry
[Report this comment]
Posted by: larryk on May 12, 2008 9:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is too polite about the Clintons who ran the most corrupt administration since Grant (check it out the convictions and absconders from justice in his administration) pardongate, travelgate, whitewater, Marc Rich, the Lincoln bedroom rentals, missing furnishings, Tysons, China, Mena are still just the tip of the iceberg.
I would truly like to know what they did for anyone but themselves in 8 years. NAFTA was his only majopr legislative accomplishment - which was Republican sunion-busting policy, foreign policy was either too late (Bosnia) or never (Rwanda). Except getting elected - which made them multimillionares - they never succeeded at anything significant - Health Care reform is only one relevant example. All I remember about their attitude toward African Americans was Queen Latifa, Republican welfare reform, and that illegitimate kid. I have no idea why Toni Morrison made her comment, but check out Alice Walker on theroot.com for a more through analysis than one throwaway line from a White House guest made into a slogan by the media. Their corruption so polarized the country people thought W would be relief from the lies and low life behavior they brought to the White House. It sure was not their politics, because they did't do anything with their triangulation "strategy" which meant unprincipled opportunist paths of least resistance. They pardoned criminals who paid, but could not release Leonard Peltier, a poet. You people that like the Clintons need to go read a book - any book about them they or their retainers did not write. A media that has given them a free ride is no excuse. Start with Sam Smith for example (progrev.com). I haven't even mentioned Vince Foster and the other unsolved crimes of their era. Ignorance is curable. It is a total mystery why anyone that knows anything about them would support the Clinton's again. Look at her campaign: dysfunctional and overpaid - a bunch of mercenaries. Thank God and Barack Obama that we are all but rid of them. Its the first step toward healing this country. With Obama we can start paying attention to issues rather than symptoms of sociopathology. Obama is going to win in a landslide. The guy with the loose bearing doesn't have a (I was going to say prayer - but the media has been so busy with J.Wright we haven't yet heard from his Catholic-hating gay-bashing minister) hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: larry Posted by: OK Granny

Comments are closed-

freedom in america
[Report this comment]
Posted by: davebarry on May 12, 2008 9:15 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whatever happen to equality? Blacks can be 90% for Obama but if only 40% of the white democrats are for Hillary, than we are profiling. Blacks used to call Bill Clinton the first black president. And I believe most people of my status had a good economic life under the Clintons.I will vote for the democrat that gets the nomination.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Economic Life Posted by: bessie

Comments are closed-

Ghastly Hillary
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bessie on May 12, 2008 10:31 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are few words left for or about Hillary. It's tedious, ghastly and beyond belief. The first time I felt this way was when that Green guy tried to portray Obama as a drug dealer & an Uncle Tom-oreo with his "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" reference in a really wierd sentence. Hillary just sat there & smiled smugly.You have to be of a certain age to pick up on some of this stuff but it's been shocking except to say that it reminded me of my own high school experiences. I wanted to think that Hillary didn't really understand. Of course she did, she just said it point blank.I have no idea how anyone could not think of her as a racist, as she's employed everything that would create a racial divide. That's my definition of a racist and anyone can try to sugarcoat it - but it's ghastly and that's Hillary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ghastly Hillary Posted by: OK Granny
» RE: Methodists Hate Whites? Posted by: bessie

Comments are closed-

HILLARY CLINTON IS A CLASSY LADY.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: OK Granny on May 12, 2008 10:45 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not agree with the author's assessment of Mrs. Clinton. The media has consistently taken words out of context or twisted the meaning. The Clintons have always respected the AAs in this country.
I find the remarks from Obama bragging about his being the first AA on the Harvard Review over the top in arrogance and his remarks about his white grandmother insulting.
Rational thinkers do not believe a man would sit in a church for 20 years if he did not believe in the fundemental teachings of that church. Obama's church is hate-mongering and racist against White people. The church believes that BLACKS ARE THE CHOSEN PEOPLE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What are you talking about? Posted by: bessie
» Arrogance Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

OBAMA CAMPAIGN SINKS TO NEW LOW
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mindtrvlr on May 12, 2008 11:42 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary is one of the last people to be racist. This article is nothing but trash. I see the Obamaites have learned well from George Bushes tactics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:Sugarcoat Posted by: bessie
» RE: AMEN, West! Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Bill's Flashback Posted by: desidid
» "Osama Obama"? Posted by: xconservative

Comments are closed-

Obama's Grotesque Insult to American Women
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JKR on May 13, 2008 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, believe it or not, that is how some of us feel about Obama's campaign. Hillary is constantly vilified while Obama is "untouchable" because he is an African American and nobody wants to be seen as a racist. Well, guess what, everyone who has made any question about Obama's credentials has been called a racist so it no longer has the negative meaning it once had. If somebody is calling you a racist, it might just mean that you are an independent thinker who is concerned about the future of your country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» A peculiar symmetry Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Hillary's Gift To Women
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fanny666 on May 13, 2008 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary's Gift To Women

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks for the link! Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Hillary's Gift To Women Posted by: Rosasharn

Comments are closed-

The only country where being the smart (half) black guy is a detriment
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Kym525 on May 13, 2008 12:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rest of the world has got to be looking at the United States and wondering what kind of collective drugs we must be taking.

Only in this twilight zone mentality could a man raised by a single mom on food stamps who put himself through a presigious Ivy League university and became the first black on a law review who just paid off the mortgage on the house that he and his wife and two little girls now live in EVER be considered "an elitist". Since when has it ever been a detriment to be an intelligent and thoughful candidate with class?

Only when that intelligent, thoughtful and classy guy is (half) black. Ye gads! Hide yer daughters, the darkies are coming!

The truth is, it has been those same "hard-working white Americans" with their unfounded fears of miscegenation and their crutch of "god, guns and gays" that have given this country EIGHT years of GW and his failed domestic and foreign policies. These so-called "hard-working white Americans" seem to be more concerned with the statements of Jeremiah Wright and whether or not said (half) black candidate is patriotic enough rather than the state of our slowly crumbling infrastructure. No decent health care and our educational system is in the dumps, but the most important thing has GOT to be Michelle Obama's statement about being "proud to be an American for the first time in her life". These same so called "hard-working white Americans" (as if the only hard working Americans are WHITE) are losing their homes in record numbers, but are more concerned whether or not a candidates middle name means he's a Muslim.

So now, someone try and convince me this really doesn't boil down to race. I dare you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The censors have arrived Posted by: westomoon
» The lumpenproletariat Posted by: westomoon
» You are HILARIOUS! Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

It sure looks like a duck to me
[Report this comment]
Posted by: robbie.seal on May 13, 2008 1:53 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I sounded like a duck too...

I wonder if she can spin it to be a chicken...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

REACTION TO EVERY POST THUS FAR......
[Report this comment]
Posted by: wernersi on May 13, 2008 2:03 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gore Vidal told Amy Goodman last week he wishes American citizens were better informed about their country and other nations. (A most important book about our earlier catastrophe in Vietnam by Felix Greene was called "A Curtain of Ignorance.") I see the extremely diverse totality of our "culture" as "preadolescent." My audacity of hope is that more wisdom will come with age....long after this senior has skipped off this mortal coil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Bill's Flashback
[Report this comment]
Posted by: desidid on May 13, 2008 6:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is what Bill Clinton said when he was running for President. Seems he didn't like this type of campaigning when it was being used against him. Who's borrowing from the Republicans now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bill's Flashback Posted by: westomoon

Comments are closed-

Switch & Bait
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bessie on May 13, 2008 9:16 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama never belittled Hillary's role as First Lady .When she started to claim that she was some sort of Co-President, he questioned that. Last time I checked being a Co-President is not in our Constitution. Most of Hillary's claims proved to be untrue and trumped up - like in Bosnia. Face it, Hillary ran a terrible campaign & there's nothing sexist in stating that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

OSAMA HUSSIEN OBAMA SAY'S IT ALL
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mindtrvlr on May 14, 2008 1:08 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WHAT A BUNCH OF LOSERS

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No, but . . . Posted by: Scientz
» RE: No, but . . . Posted by: mindtrvlr

Comments are closed-

One thing's for sure
[Report this comment]
Posted by: talkville on May 14, 2008 4:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The upcoming election, regardless of which candidate wins, will certainly reflect the distance between the Actual and the Ideal with respect to the claims made as to 'civilization', 'culture' and 'advancement' within our social base. And not only among the Establishment but among those "ordinary" citizens which most of us fall into. I'm not optimistic.

Mrs Clinton seems to think that only 'white' individuals are worthy of including into concepts such as 'blue-collar', 'hard-working' and 'working class'; her conceptual frame seems to be shared by large sections in the Mainstream Media (and elsewhere).

Let's see what develops by November, 2008. I'm not optimistic as to what the results of this election will reveal. The "Social Mirror" so far does not present an altogether pretty picture.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Free Speech
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Reader11722 on May 14, 2008 12:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You don't have to vote for her but she has a right to say whatever she wants. This is all about the Free Speech. Let's not follow the gov't down the path of censorship. After all, censorship is becoming America's favorite past-time. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like America Deceived (book) from Amazon and shut down Ron Paul. Free Speech forever (even for Hillary).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Free Speech Posted by: Longdream

Comments are closed-

You Morons:
[Report this comment]
Posted by: jvaljon1 on May 14, 2008 5:08 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's NOT BLACK AS AMERICANS RELATE TO "BLACK"--that is to say, his color derives from a Kenyan father. A father who was not two or three or ten generations or whatever, removed from Kenya--but rather one who was BORN in Kenya. So he's not just an elitist--he's masquerading as something he's not.

Look--my Dad was black. By skincolor I'm white. My mother was white. The vagaries of genetics being what they are, that's how I came out. That's by skincolor. My FATHER WAS ALGERIAN. Is that black? He sure was--yet he identified with Algerian Arabs. What Dad would say (if he were still among us) is something on the lines of: Black is as black does. (In my Dad's French accent that'd sound real funny, as if Daddy was talking about a coal chute or something).

I think from my perspective, that if Obama was, say, someone on the order of Julian Bond or some other elder statesman of the Democratic Party who happens to be black, we wouldn't be hearing all this. So my question is: why a 1-term Senator? Why now? Why challenge the otherwise nominee by default--wife of man who ran the most successful and popular Administration yet?

Hmmm. I smell a rat. A REPUBLICAN RAT. Anyone else here, smell the same?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I smell something, all right Posted by: xconservative
» I AGREE, TOTALLY Posted by: mindtrvlr
» Pot and Kettle Posted by: xconservative
» RE: Pot and Kettle Posted by: mindtrvlr
» Gee, what a clever rebuttal! Posted by: xconservative
» Try to keep up, darlin' Posted by: westomoon
» RE: Try to keep up, darlin' Posted by: mindtrvlr

Comments are closed-

THE MONEY BEHIND OBAMA IS