Local Democratic honchos where I live have said essentially the same thing.

I'm getting tired/scared of people trying to warn/help being rebuffed/ignored.

.

community? TIA

Thanks so much for thinking of us and feeling the need to "remind" us of what happened during the 2008 campaign.

Even though your video relates to something that happened about seven years ago and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the decades -- plural -- of Clinton relationships with the black community that the author of the piece was talking about.

It's very kind of you to come in here and "remind" us of something that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. It doesn't look like a desperate and transparent attempt to change the topic at all.

Apparently we were not talking about the same "ties."

decided that black folks can be outraged and talk about the racism/cluelessness/tone deafness of the Clintons from sun up until sun down but the MILLISECOND we try to discuss any of the racism/cluelessness/tone deafness from the Sanders campaign, all of a sudden these same folks feel the need to chime in to "remind" us about the Clintons or scream about our "race baiting".

NO ONE black has forgotten about the Clintons, particularly when Clinton ran against Obama. But the idea that we are only allowed to discuss/holler/scream about THEIR racism/cluelessness from 7-8 years ago but we can't say one damn thing about any misgivings we may have about Sanders along the same vein is so cravenly dishonest and stupid, I refuse to believe that anyone could believe this and call themselves a progressive.

Does that mean you have given Bill a pass on all the draconian law enforcement changes that impacted heavily on black Americans?

I have some idea why you felt the need to ask such a bizarre and seemingly pointless question, but then I'd be giving you the impression that I was interested.

Like I said, no one in this forum needs to be reminded about the Clintons. But we are incredibly humored by those who have nothing to say when we discuss racism in prison sentencing, housing, media, employment etc. etc. etc. but race in here like Carl Lewis whenever they think there is the potential to gin up anything anti-Clinton or pro-Sanders.

'Tis a fascinating thing, isn't it??

.


Making blanket comments about me being a Sanders supporter just shows the same generalizations criticized.

Having taken quite a few poli-sci courses, having politically engaged family members, growing up in a politically engaged household that stressed civic duty and equality, I have a pretty decent optic on what I comment on. As a kid, my family spent weekends helping to revitalize sections of Camden, NJ. We sacrificed income, food, clothing, etc. as my family pursued civil justice. I am civic-minded and my kids are being raised the same way. While I partially get where you are coming from, since we have different intersectional backgrounds, my commenting as an authority of your community would be just as narrow as Sheryl Sandberg's comments about women Leaning In (something that was destroyed by Bell Hooks-The Feminist Wire).


Studying political history, nothing will change regarding the political institutions of this country if there isn't a disruption to it. It was mostly passive changes that we've seen over the centuries in this country, with the exception of major institutionally-disruptive milestones such as the Civil War, Suffrage, WWII (with women working), and the Civil Rights Movement. The ERA was kind of stopped because Phyllis Schlafly mobilized conservative women, who helped to stop the ERA, as 45% of the US women ended up being against it. Why isn't there an ERA now? Mostly because small bills were enacted to grant partial relief. Just enough to take the pressure off of another ERA drive (which I totally support having the ERA enacted). The same thing is happening in the AA community, just enough relief to prevent faction, just enough to prevent another national protest movement. But, where does that leave the progress in this society? It leaves us pretty much where we are, where politicians talk about change to get the vote, and nothing happens.


Just as black women were co-opted by the white upper-class women during the later part of the 19th Century and straight through to the suffrage movement--only to be ignored after their goals were met, the same thing will continue to happen. Stuff has to change, and it's not going to change by retaining the status quo.


.

countless, endless number of articles about how counter-productive and destructive so many of them are keep getting written? That everyone should say "SOME" Sanders supporters?

All of your impressive education aside, you came into this thread to divert the topic away from the subject at hand and yank it to one that clearly YOU find more interesting/relevant, what those of us who are regulars in this forum want be damned, apparently.

The discussion was about Sanders' really terrible lack of support in minority communities and how that would probably be the main reason -- out of MANY reasons -- that his campaign will be unsuccessful. That was it.

And I find your comments about nothing happening without "disruption" to be as unsupported by facts as they are irrelevant to this conversation.

.


I will say that getting very little air time, sans the past several weeks, and having coded and slanted news articles and questions help contribute to suppress Sander's messages from getting out. As someone who voted for Bill Clinton, he had little name recognition at the start, at least up in the Northeast. Just as Sanders lacks recognition in the Southern states. Bill Clinton still remains the Big Dog, but there seems to be a conflation between his persona and HRC's to some degree. NAFTA destroyed a lot of low-middle income jobs in this country, benefiting the wealthy. While Clinton was in for two terms, we had two of Bush, and almost two of Obama, the black community has slid backwards on the economic scale. If passive forces are the future, what's going to change the institutional racism in congress, without some of them being thrown out of office?


Disruption is only unsupported to those who are unfamiliar with political history. History shows, major disruptions were the driving force for most large-scale social changes in this country. Passive changes might take another century. I know my thoughts are not wanted, so I won't bother replying anymore here.


.

I've never seen people with such a shallow understanding/perception of things be so convinced of their own superiority.

For all of Clinton's faults and flaws, the black community had doors opened under him that were practically welded shut before. Black unemployment and college graduation were completely different animals under Clinton. One of the reasons that so many black people STILL support the Clintons is because of the (relative) economic prosperity so many had under his terms. Or was that just black people being "unfamiliar" with the status of their own economies back then too?

The economy of the entire country has fallen into the toilet since Bush, and as the old adage says "when white America gets a cold, black America gets the flu." Because of CENTURIES of racist policies, black people have always been more vulnerable to economic downturns than whites. That has NEVER changed. You will -- again -- not find one person in this forum who is unaware of what the current economic state of black America is. What you will find is different opinions/perspectives on why that's happened, but as you've already deduced that any difference of opinion to yours is the result of being "unfamiliar" with history, I won't dare waste more of your time.

I won't bother replying anymore here.

Okay by me.

that they are doing anything good for anybody.

Even if the regulars in the AA forum WEREN'T some of the most educated, intelligent posters here, even if we were all a bunch of half-literate hillbilly's that spelled like Killer Mike doing his Tweets, I still think it takes brass stones to come in here and try to "educate" a bunch of folks who have access to information and experiences that you could never imagine. It is astonishing to me.

When they do that kind of thing, we see them coming from a mile away.

From a toast often giving by Boston Irish politicians:

May those that love us, love us.
And those that don't love us,
May God turn their hearts.
And if He doesn't turn their hearts,
May He turn their ankles
So we will know them by their limping.

Or at least in general.

I don't give anyone a pass on anything, as a personal policy.

I am sure you and others notice I never use this forum to promote Hillary Clinton. As a lapsed Baptist I hope my quiet witness speaks for itself.


Love ya, Numbe23


DSB

and we just keep right on stepping, mainly because the ones doing so are HERE. You hear what I'm saying? They are members of this forum and of this community. They post regularly -- both in this forum and throughout DU -- about the issues that affect all black people and are passionate about those issues.

Who folks support for this year's presidential race is a big fucking Who Cares? in this forum. We'll still be black long before whoever takes office and long after they leave. The ONLY criteria that means anything here is whether people give a genuine shit about black people. That's it.

Unlike the rest of DU, I think we all respect each other here. We're all pretty much on the same page here with respect to the AA community and the Democratic Party at large. I just want the DEMOCRAT to win this year, whether it's Secretary Clinton, Governor O'Malley or Senator Sanders. I'm fine with all 3 of them, and I'd happy to vote for any of them in the General Election.

You're right, the issues that are front and center her ARE so much bigger. I'm still being educated, so I feel the best I can do is click Rec to show my support, usually. A bit off-topic, but I told my son what Dr. West said about President Obama. He was appalled!

Yes. Absolutely YES!!! And I think it's that mutual and very real respect and understanding that we are all here out of love/interest/respect for the AA community that keeps this group so lively, informative and REAL. We can smell/spot poseurs from a mile away and we make it abundantly clear that we have absolutely no interest in them or their crap. Or at least, I make it pretty clear to them.

but I told my son what Dr. West said about President Obama. He was appalled!

When that man said that Obama "fears free black men" he lost me forever. From that very SECOND on. I was done. Gone.

have to sit thru.

The issues normally discussed here are going to (sadly) still be with us after the next president rides off into the sunset. We gain little and lose much if our energy is consumed arguing about this year's flash in the pan instead of what we need to be putting into the slow cooker.

Too many people who "discover" this group when the opportunity arises to bash one of the candidates do so in ways that are appallingly demeaning to AA members, and they change the character of our discussions. The steak in the pan looks mighty good (at least to the carnivores) but it will only feed a few. We can all add our bits to the soup that will feed masses.

these days and probably been that way for a while.

you are right about issues being much bigger than the primary. and the fact is for a long time it was mainly hillary clinton who was attacked on this forum since she was the one who was mostly thought to run for president. but her supporters didn't come in and try to control things and attack others. once sanders got in he got crticism also but the reaction from his so called supporters was much different.

i notice the ones i can't stand the most are ones i have had a problem with since before sanders got in the race.

one is especially bad right now in complaining about hillary and black voters. this person doesn't care about black voters and cheered on Obama being called a piece of shit even though many said how hurtful it was especially for the black community. fuck anyone who defended that and i can't take any concern they have for minorities seriously after that crap.

Yours has been one of the few voices of sanity here for years. I was just thinking about how good it is to see Empowerer and Frenchiecat back. But so many posters of color here have left and not come back and I genuinely don't blame them at all.

for prez is on the Black vote, you think?

Are they just now realizing the dynamics, the demographics, or that the extent of the importance of the Black vote is this vital?

Some of these lecturers are sincere, knowing what they know about Bernie they simply cant understand how any minority group or person couldn't support him, I admit I have had those thoughts to some extent.

But then I did something that I dont always do and should, I listened to what POC were saying about their experience and how it relates to Bernie vs Hillary or for that matter ANY white politicians making promises.

Once you listen and attempt to put yourself in someone else's position, you can make sense of that which previously seemed not to.

In fact, having listened around here long enough, and to one other particular POC friend I have, I dont believe what I once did about a few things.

But honestly, even if I had, well it isn't all about me. It's OK for people to talk about things that make me uncomfortable.

I want Bernie to win, but he won't unless he realizes this and deals with it properly.

I'm not a political maven, but even I can see this.

On edit.

Meant her ties to the AA community. Apparently that was *not* what was in the vid.

I generally do not watch videos for information, since reading is so much faster. (Unless, of course, the information is emotional rather than factual, but even in that case I generally find a shorter video does the trick.)

.


As I posted this video link earlier, due to the negativisms I'm seeing here towards social programs I hold dear as a staunch Democrat. I believe the way out of our social disparities requires a disruption of the political institution to some degree. As a poli-sci continuing ed student, who respects both Clinton and Sanders, this post was difficult to make. But, there are scores of others that are far more damaging, that poli-sci people and political campaigns have. I will not contribute any further towards this mess beyond what this video post conveys, or post the detailed ugliness of the meanings of Olbermann's comments.


My goal is for a Dem, ANY Dem, to retain the White House and foster down-ballot Dem wins.


The African American community was set back over a century, partly due to the actions of Booker T. Washington. As a W. E. B. DuBois fan, there will be no institutional corrections made, if a passive approach continues. It will just be more co-opting of the black, latino/latina, and other minority votes. Lip service will be applied as the social safety nets are slowly rolled back. I do not want to see that happen. After my Women and Politics course last year, I saw sure HRC was going to walk away with the nomination and staunchly supported her. But it seems she slides closer and closer to the right, and offers up core Democratic principles along the way, things that have taken over a century and a half to formulate. I stepped back and remain neutral now, seeing where this goes.


I will not promote further deterioration to this party, but I will call out wrongness when I see it. I would gladly participate defending HRC when bogus posts are made, but William blocked me from the group when I posted a non-candidate post about how Disney offshores its profits Luxembourg. I was told, ONLY when I commit to the HRC campaign, would I be allowed to possibly rejoin--if I petition them. I remain a neutral Dem. While I am adult enough to realize that the HRC group is their sandbox, and they can run it any way they choose, I also cannot contribute to defending or supporting her on many of the posts. So, I just ignore most of the posts from that group, as I remain voiceless there. That being said, many of the posts at GD: P are just over-the-top or just the same incessant cheerleading. Regardless of what happens, I will vote for the Dem nominee, whoever that is.


.

I am now officially confused, not that that's anything new to me.

I wonder why the gentleman keeps saying he's a continuing Poli Sci student as if that is dispositive of something.


It's also odd that he would argue Booker T. Washington set back African American progress a century. Yes he was conservative but there were much larger forces that impeded black progress than the voice of one lone conservative black intellectual.

How Booker T. Washington or his compadres (My dad's paternal grandfather was a close friend) set us back centuries, and I'm not watching the video.

He was Conservative for these times.


He was a Survivor in his.


We were Republicans once because . . . Where else were we going to go?

If only Harding had survived - the expansion of black people to earn a decent living might have changed our course in this country.

I suspect the fact one was born a slave and the other wasn't, one was educated in the north and highly educated at that, and the other wasn't influenced the two men.


Did you ever see Ragtime ? Here is a portrayal of Booker T. Washington and the dichotomy of his times:

My mind is better for E.L. Doctorow being in this world and sharing his stories of America.

I also vaguely remember the performances by Cagney, Howard Rollins, and Molly Steenburgen.

"set us back" is beyond me.

My father was a grad. He didn't have the rigidity of his dad and brothers for Morehouse and no one was letting him into The Citadel or West Point. Tuskeegee was great for those wanted military careers in the 1950's.

A Piece of shit used car salesman . . . Somewhere on the interwebs I read that.

Too bad his ego got in the way

And Sanders is still not polling well with African American or Latino voters and so maybe he needs to change what he is doing http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/01/poll-sanders-gains-stop-short-of-minorities.html#

And still a Bernie supporter, I agree.

From what I've seen here, quite a few of the AAs who are even aware of Bernie are trying to *help*. I continue to be baffled.

swear I saw a guy with a confederate flag shirt.

NO matter which candidate the left chooses, the left best get behind her or him as if their lives depend on it, and I dont mean just those most at risk but ALL liberals.

And this wont happen if certain folks keep going out of their way to create an ever increasing gap between the supporters.

It is obvious where this is happening.

Feel sure you've seen this. But wonder what you think of Nina Turner and how she's decided that he is the person who can best move this forward?

She believes that Sanders "is the person who can best move this forward." That's great. She has a right to her opinion. But I don't share that opinion and the fact that she is a black woman, like me, does not mean that we should think alike.

One of the problems in this debate is the tendency of Sanders supporters to stick a black person in our faces and say "see? SHE supports Sanders" as if all black people should think alike and, if Nina Turner supports Sanders, why don't I? Interestingly, I don't see that being done on the flipside. Exponentially more black people support Hillary Clinton than support Bernie Sanders, but many Sanders supporters do not take OUR opinion seriously or assume that other blacks should support Hillary Clinton because we do. In fact, whenever we express anything beyond the purest admiration for Bernie Sanders, many Sanders supporters tell us we don't know what we're talking about.

All black folk do not think alike. Nina Turner supports Sanders and that's great. But that does not mean that all other black people should, any more than the fact that lots of white people support Hillary Clinton means that all white people should line up behind her.

I really don't and haven't wanted to see it devolve in any way.

You obviously have some very strong and I'm sure legitimate reasons to go for Hillary.

I personally am impressed by the several things I put out there, and they go with my worldview, but that is absolutely no reason for you to agree.

I'd like to agree to disagree, for the moment, and wish you well.

Empower - I hope you empower many.

I wish you well, as well.

Why??? And you are now posting it in the AA forum!

And why are you "countering" one black person's opinion by posting another one's? What point are you trying to make here?

This points up something I've noticed over the years. Many of these folks - even so-called liberals - are so unfamiliar with black people that they really think we're all alike and believe we are fungible with any one black person being sufficient to switch out with any other black person.

I remember noticing this after President Obama first took office and the RNC made Michael Steele its Chair. It was if they thought, Obama's black, Steele's black. Checkmate!

We see the same thing when Republicans trot out their black person of the moment, certain that black folks will get excited and jump to support them, just as we supported President Obama. They don't realize and definitely don't acknowledge that Obama is not just any ordinary guy. There's a reason that a fatherless black man named Barack Hussein Obama was able to rise to become the first African-American president of the United States - and it wasn't because he's cute. He has unique and extraordinary political skills that few people - regardless their race - can demonstrate.

But, by the same token they interestingly take the opposite tack when it comes to Obama in other respects, especially his intellect and decency. Throughout the 2008 campaign, people marveled at how SMART Obama was, how ARTICULATE (or, as Joe Biden remarked, CLEAN and articulate) he was, how decent he was, etc., as if this was something unusual. And I noticed that such observations were rarely made by black voters. That's because, in those respects, Obama wasn't that unusual to us. We all know smart, articulate, decent African-American men and women. While the President is in the upper percentile of most people, he's not some kind of bizarre aberration, at least not to us. In fact, he's not that much different in those respects than our brothers and fathers and sons and cousins. What's different is that for the first time, the rest of the world seemed to accept what we already knew about people who look like us.