Barak Obama is Wrong! Clinton Comment is not Racially Insensitive: Here's why.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 3:37 PM GMT
    Ok, I am so sick of this! Here is what the damned lady said.

    "I would, and I would point to the fact that that Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the President before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done. That dream became a reality, the power of that dream became a real in peoples lives because we had a president who said we are going to do it, and actually got it accomplished."

    There is absolutely nothing incorrect about what she said. Only because it is a white woman saying it are these people accusing her of being insensitive! It is a 100% fact that LBJ was a huge factor in the Civil Rights Act of 64 being passed. Clinton doesn't give LBJ any other credit, and further doesn't say something in the lines of "if it wasn't for a white man, a black man's dream wouldn't be realized" To that, she said "President" not "white president"

    Further, for people to separate LBJ from the civil rights movement just because he is white is completely racist!! There were white Christians, Jews, Italians, Irish, New England wasp housewives, and every other kind of honkey marching along side with black people in the 1960s. It started off as a small few but later in the movement became a great many! So for Barak Obama to say that what Hillary said is irresponsible is absolutely revolting! It shows how petty he is, and how petty people can be when it comes to race.

    If an historical fact about the Civil Rights Movement such as this is "offensive" than we must all be living in a fairytale. Perhaps we should rewrite history and pretend that only black people were responsible for the Civil Rights Movement. Hmm, but that would defeat one of the very important facts about the movement.

    No better yet, perhaps we should have waited until we had a black president to pass the Civil Rights Act. Then, we could openly acknowledge that he was responsible for doing so, without it being misconstrued as racially insensitive.

    The Civil Rights Movement and what Dr. King stood for was not for blacks only! It was for equality of all people, people of every race and religion. Even though he only mentions Judeo-Christians, Whites and Blacks and doesn’t acknowledge Atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Homosexuals, etc. etc. etc... I still know his heart was in the right place, and somehow he was standing up for me too.

    And in case you’d like to argue what I’m saying, here’s the end of Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.

    “And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 3:41 PM GMT
    She is talking about how movements don't prosper without good leadership...and that's evident in modern times...we rang bells and sang songs forever and not one damn thing happened to end the iraq war. It requires strong leadership as well as an active and informed public. They go hand in hand.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 3:51 PM GMT
    Active and informed public? Wait what country is this again?
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jan 14, 2008 4:13 PM GMT
    I think Mrs. Clinton didn't do anything wrong, except these days (especially with the campaign and how people disect and analyze every word) is for her to say something... then at the end emphasize what she meant...

    But then if she did that, she would be accused of being a "robot candidate" and a "scheming woman"... which she is anyway......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 4:22 PM GMT
    And LBJ did it knowing full well that it would have catastrophic consequences for the Democratic party...his party.

    When he signed the Civil Rights Act, he said, I have just handed the South to the Republicans for the next 50 years.

    That is more than leadership, it is statesmanship. Putting the good of the country over his party's interests.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 4:28 PM GMT
    Trance23 saidActive and informed public? Wait what country is this again?

    ImagiNATION!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 4:54 PM GMT
    Andrew Sullivan, who is rabidly anti-Clinton wrote this (I know I post his stuff often, but he is informative if you remember his natural bias against the Clintons):
    SullivanThe benign interpretation of the Clintons' evocation of the importance of an LBJ to complement an MLK is about the need for legislative activity to enshrine the vital work of civil rights activists. As such, it's a perfectly reasonable analogy to make, if a little condescending to King. But does it reflect who the Clintons actually are? Are they really today's version of LBJ? In fact, unlike most others in this race, we have some direct evidence of how the Clintons, given the power of the White House, responded to the civil rights movement of their own time.

    In the 1990s, we saw a burst of grass-roots activism, protest and rhetoric in defense of gay and lesbian equality. Out of the ashes of the AIDS epidemic, the gay rights movement rose like a phoenix. And the Clintons, seeing a fund-raising opportunity, reached out to some in the movement to finance their own campaign. Those donors trusted them. I wrote the TNR endorsement. But as soon as the gays had performed their role - financing the Clintons in power and supporting their campaign - the Clintons turned on us. They dropped their promise to end the military's ban instantaneously and then presided over a doubling of the discharges of gay servicemembers under the hideous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. They then used the other emerging civil rights issue - marriage equality - to triangulate against gay couples. They ran ads on Christian radio stations bragging about the Defense of Marriage Act that president Clinton eagerly signed. And the only gay people they embraced were those willing to continue to trade money for access - and loyalty to the Clintons. Who helped them devise this anti-gay strategy? Dick Morris. Who recommended hiring him in the first place? Hillary Clinton.

    Johnson risked his entire coalition on the issue of civil rights - a heroic act that still reverberates today. The Clintons wouldn't risk a smidgen of a percentage point in a Mark Penn poll for the duration of a news cycle. That's the difference.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 5:15 PM GMT
    Trust Andrew Sullivan to turn anything into an anti-Clinton screed.

    "In a large mixing bowl, combine 1 cup flour,
    2 eggs,
    1/4 teaspoon baking soda,
    1/2 cup sugar
    Mix well
    Bill Clinton couldn't keep it in his pants
    And chill in the refrigerator until the dough is cold.

    After one hour,
    Roll out the dough on a floured surface
    Hillary Clinton personally murdered Vince Foster
    Then cut into squares.

    Bake in a 375 degree oven
    For 12-14 minutes
    Rose Law Firm records vanish and reappear conveniently
    Or until the edges turn a golden brown."
  • irishkcguy

    Posts: 780

    Jan 14, 2008 5:32 PM GMT
    Her "spadework" comment seemed far more potentially offensive than this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 6:09 PM GMT
    whether he hates the clintons or not is inconsequential. I think it still demonstrates well the fact that Bill was not LBJ for the gays, and it is a good chance hillary may follow suit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 14, 2008 6:56 PM GMT
    Barack Obama is not wrong. The media, which misquoted Clinton to begin with, has sensationalized this. Barack would be a fool to not react to it.

    Race was bound to come up in this race eventually and the accuracy and intent of what Clinton said is moot at this point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2008 12:27 AM GMT
    We're all correct in different ways. The media did misquote it, but Barak Obama only fed the flames. He's lost serious points in my book. Leading up to the primaries I was 50/50 on the fence between Obama and Clinton. After hearing him in the debates and seeing how he's run his campaign I've lost any ounce of respect I had for him. He has no platform, no concrete plans and is so arrogant about his stance that I simply can't stomach him any longer. And the Obama/Edwards tag teaming against Clinton is just so petty. I just hope it backfires, essentially killing two birds with one stone.

    PLUS..any liberal candidate that the Republicans get all goofy over, such as Nader, and now Obama, can't be a good one to follow. The Republicans know how to manipulate the other side and can sniff out an election killer in seconds.

    Note: The Republican Party donated large sums of cash to the Nader campaign in order to strengthen him and pull votes away from Gore.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 15, 2008 4:42 AM GMT
    Devildog:

    Obama has less appeal to to the democratic base than does Clinton. He draws Independents, centrist Republicans, and ultra liberals. His appeal is much broader than you indicate. If you look at his platform on his website (the platform indicated in the debates hasn't been relevant since debates were nationally televised) you will see that it is much more progressive than Clinton's.

    But, once again, as far as the MLK, LBJ quote is concerned, it is best that we all get beyond the media hype and examine the candidates and how they perform against the leading republicans, all five of them.
  • TallGWMvballe...

    Posts: 1925

    Jan 15, 2008 8:21 AM GMT
    Devildog,

    As one who took part in several of those marches and met Dr King, I say BRAVO TO YOU!

    HILIRY CLINTON is/was correct and you show it eloquently yourself.
  • scrumrob

    Posts: 92

    Jan 18, 2008 7:07 AM GMT
    sickothesame saidwhether he hates the clintons or not is inconsequential. I think it still demonstrates well the fact that Bill was not LBJ for the gays, and it is a good chance hillary may follow suit.


    If it comes to a choice between Hillary Clinton and any of the Republican candidates, including McCain, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. She might not be our friend, but she is likely to be friendlier than any Republican running.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 19, 2008 6:09 PM GMT
    Thanks TallGWMBaller! What you said means a great deal to me. You totally made my day!

    DANKEicon_razz.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 9:15 PM GMT
    Devildog --- I don't see how any explanation of Hillary's statement could be better and more inteligent than yours !!! Looks to me like you have studied this out well !!! I too cannot see what she said that could have been offensive unless "someone" was just looking for something to dig at. What she said made perfect sense and is a fact about what pushed MLK's vision to the success that it reached. There's a long way to go though isn't there, lots left to accomplish. I think Your right on it !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 9:44 PM GMT
    jprichva saidTrust Andrew Sullivan to turn anything into an anti-Clinton screed.

    "In a large mixing bowl, combine 1 cup flour,
    2 eggs,
    1/4 teaspoon baking soda,
    1/2 cup sugar
    Mix well
    Bill Clinton couldn't keep it in his pants
    And chill in the refrigerator until the dough is cold.

    After one hour,
    Roll out the dough on a floured surface
    Hillary Clinton personally murdered Vince Foster
    Then cut into squares.

    Bake in a 375 degree oven
    For 12-14 minutes
    Rose Law Firm records vanish and reappear conveniently
    Or until the edges turn a golden brown."


    um dry ingredients are mixed together seperate from the wet ingredient
    make a little mole hole in the middle of the dry ingredients pour wet ingredients into the center slowly and steadily and then mix.
    that's how you get the best results.
    Never mess with the "cooking kid" icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 9:46 PM GMT
    WOW!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 9:53 PM GMT
    Carl Bernstein was quoted on CNN as saying top aides in the Clinton campaign told him there was a deliberate effort in the campaign to marginalize Obama by painting him as a "black candidate", i.e., a Jesse Jackson of 2008. Bill Clinton's continued remarks on this subject so disturbed Ted Kennedy that Kennedy called Bill to discourage this line of campaigning. At the end of the call Ted Kennedy was angrier that at the beginning. The Clintons amazingly enough were willing to use the Richard Nixon-Lee Atwater-Karl Rove "Southern strategy" -- getting white folks upset at black folks -- to get rid of Obama.

    The Clintons have only their own interests in mind. They would promise anything to anyone or disparage anyone to get back in the WH.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 9:54 PM GMT
    I never truly understood how talking over history was racially insensitive. I don't think she should have apologized. Fact is fact.icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 10:07 PM GMT
    LOL !!! Alexander -- That was great !!! re: the "cooking kid" Do you think it was some of Obama's aides that got this all out of shape, or was it actually Obama? (this part of it has gotten lost to me) and another thing --- this re: the Florida delegates, since Clinton won in Florida, even though there was not actual debates, will she get the "LIONS SHARE" of the delegates, if they are allowed to vote at the convention?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 10:13 PM GMT
    "the world may never know"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2008 10:25 PM GMT
    LOL !!! you got that right !!! We're kept in the dark about a lot of whats going on in this process !!!
  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Jan 31, 2008 10:12 AM GMT
    I heard about this on NPR and thought that it also reflects some of the ugliness of the current campaign:

    Bossip Calls Maya Angelou a "Ho"
    "Bossip has always been edgy, but this foolishness right here is ridiculous. They have a picture of Dr. Maya Angelou underneath a caption called "Ho Sit Down". They have been consistently critical and mocking of anyone supporting Hillary Clinton labeling certain people sellouts and "ho's", including calling Hillary Clinton a "Ho" They claim that they aren't calling HER a "Ho", but what other conclusion could you come to? Wait... is that a T-mobile ad I see?
    For this and comments, go to What About Our Daughters