O'Malley apologizes for saying 'all lives matter' at liberal conference.

Later that day, O'Malley apologized for using the phrase in that context if it was perceived that he was minimizing the importance of blacks killed by police.

"I meant no disrespect," O'Malley said in an interview on This Week in Blackness, a digital show. "That was a mistake on my part and I meant no disrespect. I did not mean to be insensitive in any way or communicate that I did not understand the tremendous passion, commitment and feeling and depth of feeling that all of us should be attaching to this issue."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12811650

in people's minds. Apologies never get the attention that the original comment gets. This whole thing requires proactive attention and thought. I'm not seeing that from any of the Democratic candidates, frankly. The phrase, "All lives matter" should be on the never-to-be-spoken list for all Democratic candidates.

and went on from there to All Lives Matter.

Either people listen or they don't. Either they recognize his character or they don't. It is time for people to LISTEN and APPRECIATE.

to pay attention to the people to whom they are speaking. Shifting the blame does no good whatever. If a white candidate says, "Yes, black lives matter, but all lives matter," that candidate is just flat being stupid. Black Lives Matter is a separate issue in this election. Unless you don't think that Black Votes Matter, you're not thinking clearly. It is that simple.

People listen. People hear. People react. Candidates should know that from the very beginning. If they neglect to learn, they will not prevail in their elections.

There's no need for it. It's a qualifier. Right now, "Black lives matter" is what matters. When it comes to actual, real-life injustices, right now, "Black lives matter" is the statement that makes sense. The "all lives matter" part is not needed in any way. Not now. Not in this campaign.

I absolutely disagree with this.

ALL LIVES MATTER.

Black lives...Latino lives...White Lives...and all others.

The AA community needs to acknowledge that and agree.

Then we ALL move forward to solve what's going on with all these shootings.

Don't tell me that my life doesn't matter.

That's the big thing.

I'm a white guy. I have, on occasion, had cause for the police to talk to me. I have never been shot, tazed, punched, bludgeoned, screamed at, threatened, thrown on a car hood, or the like. I have never been put into a chokehold. I have never been denounced as a "thug" by the media 'cause a cop - or a wannabe cop - kicked my ass for smoking.

Absolutely my life matters (at least it does to me) BUT my life has never been devalued by police, by the media, by spectators, by my community, the way is done to black men and women, children and elders in this nation. My life matters sure, but it's not the one being put on the line every time I step out the fucking door.

"Black Lives Matter" is a think because of the way our society dismisses the lives of black people. It is NOT an "everyone" problem.

Really, "All Lives matter" is about on par with "the Irish were persecuted too!" - it's factually true, sure, but it's also tone-deaf and dismissive of the matter at hand.

It was vile and ugly. I watched the whole thing live on Twitter.

Maybe you should look back at the context of Hillary saying those words.

That doesn't let her off the hook. She is as much in the spotlight as the other candidates on the #blacklivesmatter issues. She needs to answer those issues even more than the others or she will see her support amongst black people decline.

And yes, it has become an insult, and is used widely by racists to mock the BLM movement.

Sorry my statement offends you, but I stand by it.

A year ago, if someone told you there would be screaming headlines reading, "Democratic Candidate X Apologizes for Saying All Lives Matter," you wouldn't have had the slightest idea why. Because we now find ourselves in an absurd place, that's why.

The way out is NOT to concede a basic phrase that reflects liberal values to the Right, but to work through the present and reclaim control of the language. This really needs to be said?

...black, white, brown...all of us, by the Third Way. I think it's counter-productive to protest the two most progressive candidates in the field. They are willing to be allies. BLM not using their heads.

of People of Color. They need to refocus. BLM should do whatever they want to do. They should call out this inattention to the real injustices they face wherever they can. If that's embarrassing for "progressive" candidates, so be it. Those candidates need to refocus and act like they get it.

Black Lives Matter is not the problem in any way. They have something to say, and everyone needs to listen closely. As I said, PoC may not vote for Republicans, but Democrats need them to vote. If they don't, Democrats lose. It is that freaking simple.

I'm not talking about any particular candidate. I'm talking about ALL of them. They're not paying attention.

...Sanders has a 50 year track record of being a strong supporter of minorities, Black, Hispanic, and LBGT. He is not ignoring the AA community, nor taking them for granted. He's the only candidate who's consistantly addressing the issues, and with concrete proposals. So, where can he improve? What is he missing? Are there concrete proposals he should be adopting? Or is this all a Swift Boat attack by the Clinton Campaign, to attack him on his strengths?

Has promised that overturning CU is a litmus test for any SCOTUS appointment. I'm sure he's for restoring the VRA, although I don't recall him specifically mentioning it. He has concrete proposals to reduce youth unemployment, particularly in the AA community, he's for raising the minimum wage to $15/hr (which helps some in the AA community, and he's called for police reform and oversight, in particular in their relations in minority communities. So, what is missing? Any suggestions?

If he becomes the nominee - that will be huge in GOTV in Camden - over the bridge from Philly. Those folks were aware in 2012 what was going on in PA.

I've seen his youth employment but I'd like to see him adopt O'Malley's trade school /apprentice initiative on the tax payer dime. If we are going to give middle class white kids free college - then we should give poor and working class urban and rural kids training that will help us move towards a green job and infrastructure renewal economy. I would also like to see his details around early childhood education and equality in public schools. O'Malley has a strong record that has lead to him being recognized by educators. These are things detailed in writing by O'Malley.

Low information types will go to Sanders site and see his key three points. I'm not sure what his strategy is by keeping it at the high level but if he wins the nomination I need in depth details of idea, done in the past, what's in it for you in the future.

Whether I'm in Hunterdon County or Newark/Camden I need that for canvassing.

Last night I was out meeting and greeting at a community event in my town - Salsa night on Main Street. The Latino community was really out and interested in our 'come out of the shadows' approach. I told them how I'm voting for O'Malley because he won't get in our way - he will run towards sanctuary towns and cities.

Another - I need Sanders to put that out there in writing.

Understand this list isn't combative - but I'm going to need his help next year. Neither Sanders or O'Malley will get in my way. I'm having a hard time articulating this in the NJ 7th for Sanders.

One thing we are doing in the O'Malley group is billeting out record, results, platform.

Take a look so we can get details. It's about stopping Republicans!

That means a lot to me.

If this was done to a Republican candidate, it would have been high fives and hallelujah all over GD?

It embarrassed beloved candidates, and that is why people object.

They should be embarrassed, because they're not paying attention. Turnout and votes from People of Color will decide this election. Any candidate who doesn't recognize that deserves to lose. If a Democratic candidate alienates that group of voters, that candidate is simply not paying attention. If a Democratic candidate doesn't know what offends that group of voters, that candidate simply does not understand what is going on and should not be in the race.

They should be embarrassed. They're failing in a very significant way.

All of them. You appear to think that I'm supporting Hillary Clinton at this point. I'm not. I'm supporting Bernie Sanders. This is not about who I'm supporting. This is about the general election and winning that election. This is about the next four years, not the next 16 months.

It's so simple. We need the active turnout and votes of People of Color to win in 2016. That's not even in question. Candidates should act accordingly and refrain from insulting that group of voters. They're not doing that. None of them.

He didn't say "all lives matter" as you seemed to suggest. I agree that saying that in response to black lives matter is breathtakingly clueless and offensive.

That should terrify anybody who would prefer to see a Democrat in the white house.

I know it terrifies me.

Or will they hold their nose and vote for the progressive when he wins?

The only people pushing this here on DU are Clinton supporters. The ones who just days ago were saying that any Sanders supporters that sit this election out are pony lovers, selfish narcissists, and not seeing the big picture.

You are incorrect.

It was directed at those who say that BlackLivesMatter movement protesters will sit out.

There's a great risk of black voters staying away from the polling place. There's a great risk of PoC staying away from the polling place. If they do so, we will lose to the Republicans. There's a great risk of that, too.

So, it was directed at me. You are incorrect, as I said previously.

I am an independent who has said I will never support a Clinton presidency. I have been told I am violating all the TOS rules, that I am a leftist loon, a troll, a selfish asshole who doesn't care about women, etc. etc.

I have zero problem with any person exercising their singular right to vote as they so choose. I do not like hypocrites that play a game like this.

the Democratic nominee for President. Do you know why I will do that, whoever the nominee is?

If you understand that, you'll understand where I'm coming from. If you will not support the Democratic nominee, then I have zero time to spend discussing anything with you, frankly.

Good luck to you.

Republican.

That is holding your nose politics. Fine if you swing that way. I do not.

Just because they have a D after their name does not mean they will govern right or well.

We have both seen that if we are both being honest.

I will not work against Clinton if she is chosen. I certainly won't be here during the final countdown in November 2016. But yes, I may vote third party or just down ticket local Democratic candidates.

Doubtful they would get many followers willing to cut off their noses to spite their own faces on that level.

I think you also underestimate how much work it actually takes for most POC to vote in this country compared to the white experience in voting.

POC really have to WANT to vote.

For republicans, no lives matter, except the top .001%. Koch lives matter most of all.

For many of the super-wealthy, the rest of us are just in the way, if we are not "useful" to them.

Democratic candidates this morning. They should already have done so. They have apparently not done so.

I am looking forward to the longer statement or position paper he has promised us. He mentioned it in the followup interview yesterday.

Typically, Martin O'Malley takes criticism very well and thinks things through very carefully. A constant theme of his campaign is inclusiveness. Maybe that is what tripped him up. He believes in the dignity of every person. His principles pertain to all human beings. When republicans use the universal term "all," they really mean only "some." People who twist language for their own purposes weaken its usefulness for everyone else.

I credit O'Malley for hitting climate change, Wall Street, and other issues very hard. He has focused a lot on immigrants and Hispanics. It will be good to see him devote more speaking and writing to black persons and issues of social justice. He has it in him. He has both principle and heart. I am confident.

public. The words "all lives matter" should never again come out of his mouth, or from anyone in his or anyone else's campaign. It is seen as insulting by an important group of voters. He needs better advisers and speech writers. They all do.

I posted the video to you upthread.

You know, I really believe that he was sincere. After his time on the stage, he went into the crowd to talk to people.

I have been told that Sanders cancelled a meeting with #blackLivesMAtter after that protest.

and if people are going to admonish a Candidate for saying something that even his supporters said is wrong (and grateful for a quick apology) I really need to ask what you made of this from Bernie Sanders a few weeks ago:

(the entire transcript is at the link http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/25/417180942/sanders-my-goal-right-now-is-to-win-this-election)

However, I will defend Sanders on the issues he has expressed.

I'm talking to all three candidates in this OP. Someone needs to, that's for sure.

and you know Sanders background and his history.

Given his history, you can understand why he might be surprised that someone would question his concern for issues that affect black people. I'm sure that you don't doubt that he cares.

What is it that he needs to understand, and what is that you need to see and hear?
What part of this is he missing?

words are being heard by specific groups. That's all. I'd advise all Democratic candidates to find and hire a strong leader in black America to advise them on all issues of that nature. The votes of People of Color will be crucial next November. Being concerned about how candidates are seen by minority voting blocs should be a high priority for all Democratic candidates. That is apparently not the case at this point in the primary campaigns.

The point is not to make boneheaded errors in speeches and at events. My advice applies to each and every candidate.

It's going to take some serious guts to say that and not couch it in terms to try and defray the blowback it is/would receive in the media.

Cause that leaves the pols open to "weak on crime" and "anti-police".

Our candidates are going to have to find their inner strength and decide to do the right thing. Which isn't necessarily simple.

Ideally it's simple, yes. But practically speaking it's more complex.

He addressed the police issue that bluntly and received a great deal of applause from a very diverse and pleased crowd.

O'Malley attempted to do the same but was shouted down during the NN Town Hall.

What is it that's in the news today? It's not what he said about the police issue, is it?

Everything counts. What makes the news counts more.

He just tried to speak.

And yeah, the MSM is going to love carrying more water for the corporatists in both parties that want to kill a progressive candidacy.

Watch the videos even on CNN, and they are not as unfavorable though as you might imagine. It is hard to pin a lie on someone who isn't lying.

is bristling. I did see it. Again, what are we talking about this morning? What's in the news. That's what matters.

He rocks the house in Phoenix before 11,000+ peeps, including many AAs and Latinos, with this;

"And like everybody in this room, I want to see an America where when young black men walk down the street they will not be harassed by police officers, they will not be killed; they will not be shot!" (Standing Ovation)

"To his credit, President Obama did something extraordinary the other day, he had the courage to go to a federal jail and talk about the absurdity of a criminal justice system in which if we don't change it 1 out of 4 male African Americans born today will end up behind bars. That is NOT the America we believe in."

"And that's why we believe it makes more sense to invest in jobs and education, not jails and incarceration!"

"And to our 11 million brothers and sisters who are living in the shadows today, we say loudly and we say clearly we are going to bring you out of the shadows and on a path toward citizenship. And we're not going to divide families up, brothers and sisters... we are the wealthiest nation in the world, there is nothing we cannot accomplish."

The Phoenix appearance is a separate event. I'm not talking about that in this thread. Thanks.

and you see no connection or relevance? really?

I don't recall seeing any. This thread is not about Bernie Sanders in the first place. It is about all Democratic candidates and their unfortunate lack of attention. You may be trying to make it about Sanders, but it's not. I'm a Sanders supporter. I'm also a supporter of Democrats winning elections.

up to lose. They should know that already. If they don't, I question their qualifications for office.

They're politicians. I'm not a big fan of professional politicians, actually. They're usually so insulated from the actual voters that they appear not to even recognize issues that must be addressed. Then, they're surprised when the blocs of voters they are counting on don't show up at the polling place.

Politicians are part of the highly privileged class. They have almost universally lost touch with those who are not. I include all of them in that category. But, they are the people who are running for the Democratic presidential nominatino, so I'm telling them they need to pay attention right now. Close attention. If they don't, they'll certainly lose. That would be a disaster.

They need to think long and hard about their set piece speeches. Right now, they're screwing them up.

plagues black people.

And they are all smart enough to know that.

That's what is pissing me off this morning. Apparently, their privilege prevents them from understanding that. Maybe one of the candidates should hire a leader of the BLM group to be a campaign adviser. That would be my call, once I recognized that my own privilege kept me from understanding the issue.

I doubt that will happen, sadly.

I have heard both HRC and O'Malley say "all lives matter," as an addendum in off the cuff statements. But I do not recall Bernie saying that. Have you heard him say it? A link would be appreciated if you have one off the top of your head. I would really like to know. I freely admit it would be a gaffe if he did.

to the people? You, who have done precinct work and
know what can be done, are suggesting this?
It is mostly a matter of the power of the states, whether
it concerns policing, social and criminal justice, and
even housing.
BLM cannot succeed,if it wants to start with the Federal
government. You know that as well as I.

BTW, Obama himself talked about "all lives matter"; he
also together with Holder tried to do something about
Ferguson, without success.
I had rather the candidates tell the truth than selling
something phony.

Which is perplexing, given she has the worse record on civil rights of the three.

It applies to all of the current Democratic candidates. I said so, specifically, in my post. I'm not sure how you missed that.

Her record has thus far been ignored. She is not being attacked. Bernie who has the best record on civil rights is. It defies rationale.

All lives are not, however, equally at risk.

Seems simple enough to me.

-- Mal

Last edited Sun Jul 19, 2015, 03:22 PM - Edit history (2)

Bernie is the exception to that rule. #WeNeedBernie



For the record, I think the "all lives matter" talk is crap and it minimizes the institutionalized racism, murder, and economic injustice hoisted towards POC and immigrants that we read about daily here.

I've had Black friends say "amen" when I add on "and all lives matter". Now who has it wrong?

Seriously, if someone has a problem with all lives matter, 1) they don't get the intent of we're all the same and have the same problems. Let's talk about poor whites in the South and Applachia, just for starters, or maybe Mexican migrant workers dying in a semi-truck trailer from the heat or crossing a desert in S Texas, and yes even both groups being killed by bigoted police. Hell, people are "co-opting" it for worthy issues. I'd say that's a good thing. Credit the BLM movement for the contribution. And 2) they are spending entirely too much time on the Internet on political boards.

After getting elected, Bill Clinton engaged in a surreptitious war on black Americans. He didn't just use them and take them for granted, he abused them.

The Clintons, meanwhile, were insurgent moderates in the Democratic Party and soon to become the center of a party strategy to cement the Republicans’ “Southern Strategy” — which, perfected by Ronald Reagan, spoke to white working-class racism and resentment in the decades after the civil rights movement in race-neutral language. White Southerners (and whites generally) who still believed in racist narratives of black Americans being dangerous and lazy could be spoken to with rhetoric on “welfare reform” and “law and order.”

President Clinton’s welfare reform was offered in the increasingly bipartisan tradition of demonizing Reagan’s phantom “welfare queen,” the invented urban (read: black) mother who, presented as ubiquitous and representative of an entire culture, took gross advantage of public assistance in lieu of working. Never mind that the de-industrializing, globalizing economy was making finding a good job harder and harder in American cities, or that structural racism still kept black America in a virtually propertyless state of poverty; Reagan spoke in such a way to portray black precarity and poverty in terms of their own failure.

The electorally ambitious Clinton/DLC wing of the party learned this lesson well. Carefully race-neutral rhetoric could still convey racist narratives and appeal to white resentment: Blacks were lazy and taking your hard-earned tax dollars through overly generous federal assistance: Welfare checks, food stamps and public housing. That’s what was being said, minus any overt mention of race.

...In her seminal book “The New Jim Crow,” Michelle Alexander writes that “[President Bill] Clinton escalated the drug war far beyond what conservatives had imagined possible a decade earlier.” He scored a victory for Reaganite politics by “ending welfare as we know it” with the 1996 welfare reform law. “In so doing,” writes Alexander, “Clinton–more than any other president–created the current racial undercaste.” The Southern Strategy had become bipartisan orthodoxy.

No Black voters should never be taken for granted and all Black lives matter.

But imagine the alternative of ANY voter not voting in this election!

Think about this.

election. However, many registered voters do not vote. That's true in every election. Why is that? They're registered, so why don't they go to the polling place and vote.

Think about this.

My little rant wasn't meant for you personally, MM.

It was just directed, generally, at anyone who might not vote
out of some misguided sense of needing perfect purism from
the best candidate, who in our case is Bernie Sanders.

that Democrats have actually bent over backwards to accommodate black voters who, by and large, are a bunch of whiners that will never be satisfied and will be replaced as a voting bloc if they don't shut the fuck up and stop making other people feel uncomfortable.

Please people, don't think when someone says Black Lives Matter, they are saying yours doesn't.

It isn't about them being better

It is about stating that they are EQUAL.

It doesn't hurt anyone who is not Black when the phrase Black Lives Matter. It is not a mortal wound.

Not believing that Black Lives Matter, is exactly that---a mortal wound.

Stop getting defensive if you are not Black and hear this phrase. See situations outside of your personal filter.


Thank you

You say that "they (the three candidates) mean well, and mean for that phrase (all lives matter) to be inclusive, no doubt, but its a firebrand phrase for those to whom it matters most." Correct me if the mistake is mine and not yours, but I don't think Sanders has said "all lives matter" in response to "black lives matter." So I think your post is in error in ways that could damage the reputation of your favored candidate.

I agree, by the way, that saying that all lives matter in response to black lives matter is really offensive and remarkably clueless.

that gay voters have never been taken for granted, even when candidates were opposed to gay marriage.



It's not like we've ever been beaten in the streets, been arrested and a transgendered woman wasn't just sent to jail 3 days ago because she was arrested for being ... transgendered.

But all of that is now glossed over now that the frontrunner has "evolved". Sanders and O'Malley never needed to evolve.

I completely understand the anger that black voters feel, because I was told right here on this very forum that gay rights were the reason for losing elections. I'm not black. I can't speak for black people, but I can certainly speak up against social injustice. I'm going with the people that have perpetually spoken up for social justice long before it was convenient.

We need to have some SERIOUS reforms in our criminal justice system. We have a criminal justice system that is way past out of control.