Al Sharpton unbound

MSNBC chronologilizes Al's week:

-snip-

‘NEW GENERATION OF TOMS’
Sharpton made some of his most inflammatory remarks of this campaign season Thursday night, disparaging front-runner Dean’s record on race issues and mocking African-American leaders who endorse white candidates as a “whole new generation of (Uncle) Toms.”

-snip-

A BLAST AT SCHWARZENEGGER
Sharpton even found time to attack the governor-elect of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger. “I defend a young girl and you act like it’s a scandal. I guess if I had fondled her and her girlfriends you would have made me the governor of California,” said Sharpton in reference to reporters who question his actions during the Tawana Brawley rape hoax in the 1980s.


http://msnbc.com/news/952445.asp?0cv=CB20

n/t

geez :eyes:

n/t

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:-)

But who was the last preacher/president?

"fuck him"

I didn't realize the pope was a member of our board.

ABB!

.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

he's fucking funny and gets his point across

Al is ok in my book. His blast on Herr Gropenator is spot on.
Score another one for Reverend Al.

You?

Such a quick wit.

I don't agree with him 100%, but I always find him refreshing, brutally honest, and an asset to the Democratic Party.

I'll forgo Pruner's dispshit comment above.

how calling black congressmen that endorse white candidates uncle toms makes Sharpton an asset to the party?

why Sharpton should give a shit about a party that hasn't done dick for him?

then he shouldn't be running for prez under the party's banner.

Sharpton is nothing but a loudmouth race-baiter out to increase his own profile.

He is trying to help the forerunners remember their base.

about democratic candidates, helping African American interests?

I was always a bit uneasy about Sharpton's history of race baiting, but I was willing to give him another chance, and was actually enjoying his performances in the debates, because in many cases he was witty and dead on. Unfortunately, because an African American congressman endorses someone with a chance of getting nominated, and possibly even elected to the WH, he gets all pissy and starts accusing Dean of being anti black.

Yes, I agree with the other poster. F-ck him. He's not an asset, and fraankly looking back at it, I really don't know what he's adressed regarding African American issues in his presidential run. He definetely hasn't spoken anymore about them than the other eight running.

Sharpton is nothing but a loudmouth race-baiter out to increase his own profile.

i feel the same way.

if he doesn't wanna help the party ...then he shouldn't be running for prez under the party's banner

Why not?

white candidate to speak about it. Please don't try to snow those of us who know the facts.

The fact is that this isn't about who started it. This is about the fact that Sharpton is WRONG, and that is it unfair to call black leaders who endorse white candidates "a new generation of toms".

And Dean's comments about being the only one to talk about race has baffled me, too.

The article does NOT quote Sharpton as saying blacks who endorse whites are "a new generation of toms". It only quotes the "a new generation of toms" phrase. The rest is the reporters words.

If Al had actually said those words, then why did the reporter use his own words, and not Al's?

Dean was WRONG from the first, Al was RIGHT all along.

and you get a clearer picture of Dean and his dismissal for black liberals.

I wonder if Jesse Jackson Jr. knows of Dean's putdown of Edelman and his disregard for "technicalities" in court, saying he'll appoint "common sense" judges unconcerned with those technicalities, often weighing against minorities?

they can't handle Al or CMB either. Then they wonder why we think they are just a tad biased.

I notice the people who are attacking him are all Deanites. Coincidence, no doubt.

"What kind of country do you want?"

"Why, the kind of country where everybody's right hand grows extra large, of course!"
---
"Vote for Clark: this space paid for by the Mutant Union"
---
"My hand isn't really big, but the rest of me is extra tiny."


Sorry, couldn't resist.

considering how messed up the U.S. leadership is.....

Plus that may be the hand that got hit in vietnam....and he had to learn to use it again.......

I certainly could use a big hand...right about now...

sorry, couldn't resist...hehehehe:grouphug:

who in the fuck is he "baiting?" i agree with him 99.9% of the time...including his analysis of the new generation of toms. is he "baiting" me...or you? or is it that you just don't LIKE what he's saying?

Please explain to me why Sharpton should give a shit about a party that hasn't done dick for him?

the dem party essentially gave black people the right to vote. and the dems are still paying the price for it, every election, when they get ass-whooped in the south.

They did it for Al Sharpton. Getting black people to vote Dem had nothing to do with it. Neither did the Cold War.

Rights are not "given" - they are fought for.

:thumbsdown:

That's a really warped picture of history you're workin' with there.

oh wait...the racists wouldn't like that either :eyes: i guess what the democrats "give" they can throw away :eyes:

Easy to see where your're coming from.

You sound sorry we stood for civil rights.

Al Sharpton's a "spoiler" and very divisive, in my opinion.

This is exactly what he's doing. Look at the amount of discourse that we are having about Dean. We learn what the candidate's positions truly are.

It's about Al's being pissed that Jesse Jackson Jr. endorsed Dean instead of him. This is just a crybaby seeking attention.

Because there are some problems that the party still needs to face and get past. Sharpton is brass and calls it as he sees it right or wrong. why is it that his criticism is getting so much attention? There have been particularly nasty exchanges between Dean and Kerry and recently Gephardt and Dean. I haven't seen the types of comments about those that I'm seeing here.

Reprint from NYT, January 12, 2003

http://www.hrc.org/campaigns/2004/candidates/news/sharpton_nyt011303.asp

Asked about Senator Kerry, whom Mr. Sharpton described as the Democratic front-runner, Mr. Sharpton noted the paucity of blacks among Massachusetts's elected officials, and said he read a newspaper article the other day about racial profiling there.

"Where is Kerry in his home state?" Mr. Sharpton asked. "If I'm going to be in the debates, he's going to have to talk about that."

Mr. Lieberman, he said, was "an opponent of affirmative action," a characterization that does not square with how Mr. Lieberman describes his own views on the subject. Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri "stood with the president on the war - and was part of the leadership that was absolutely defeated in 2002."

He saved his harshest words for Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, a trial lawyer who, Mr. Edwards's advisers argued, posed the greatest threat to Mr. Sharpton's hopes of a strong showing in the South. "This guy got rich fighting for the regular guy," Mr. Sharpton said. "So I'm going to ask him at the debates: name one regular guy you fought for that you didn't get paid for. With a Sharpton-less race, he's gotten an easy ride."

Judging from your immediate attack/negative comments on this thread.

You figure it out.

..however I am still shaking my head at the prospect of Jesse Jackson Jr. endorsing Dean. Dean has made some questionable comments about affirmative action in the past--and I am sure Dean will make his position clear as he has on Medicare. It just strikes me as a bit too early for people like Jackson to endorse Howard Dean. Since Sharpton and Mosely-Braun are for better or worse considered candidate mouthpieces for the black community, certain endorsements like Jackson's should have waited out of respect.

My sense is that Sharpton's feelings have been hurt by this development. And sometimes when emotions get involved people do not express themselves in the best light--or very diplomatically.

and for the benefit of thinking people who happen to be unaware of the situation:

The US population is extremely marginalized, effectively to the same extent of some countries in Africa and South America, among other places, where you have a small wealthy elite controlling a huge % of all resources, including political power.

While the US did end legalized racial apartheid a few decades ago, the mores and AOB (attitude opinion belief) curve hangs on, with the result that non-whites still earn about 80 cents for every dollar earned by white people, and ethnic minorities are over-represented in the ranks of the poor.

Voters are almost exclusively the top 25% income tier, and when politicians do anything to "help" anybody, naturally they are going to focus on the interests of those with the discretionary resources to donate, volunteer, vote, etc.

More importantly, the corporate oligarchy who funds the campaigns in both branches of the party would be acting against its own best interests if the status quo were not maintained.

Feudalism is undeniably extremely popular for the Landlord, and it is not realistic to suppose that he will choose to have less profit out of altruism or in the interests of the long-term safety of you and your family.

All this adds up to the fact that neither party has done jackshit for ethnic minorities or low income people since the Voting Rights Act was passed, nor are they likely to, and the only reason that anyone other than a white affluent person with a limited knowledge of reality would endorse any of the bushlites is out of blatant, Uncling, brownnose self-aggrandizement.

The average apartment rent is now almost, according to the government's figures, almost 4 times the minimum wage.

No bushlite is going to multiply the minimum wage by 5 instantly, nor impose a national rent ceiling. Even their "health care" plans are mostly window dressing, and not relevant to a single mom who can afford a total of $00.00 for health care for herself and her children.

It is not realistic to expect bushlites and their supporters to take the long view, or reason that huge masses of desperately poor people with nothing to lose is not in their best interests, or that Rwanda West might not be the best legacy they could leave to their grandchildren.

I may not agree with Al Sharpton on various things, but I appreciate his frankness.

Makes Dean an asset to his party?

DTH

Since no evidence has been presented to support this position.

Sharpton was way out of line.

I'd really like to see the bottom tier candidates (the ones that have zero chance of winning the nomination) drop out so we can get some good debates. I know I'm going to get flamed, but that means: Sharpton, Braun, Edwards, Kucinich. I'd like to have Lieberman drop out, too, of course, but he keeps polling high nationally (just name recognition, but still he can use it as an excuse for him to stay in.) I'm really surprised the DNC has not put pressure on the lower tier yet - I wonder what they are up to.

Each debate there is about 5 minutes total time for each to speak, and that is not enough. They never get past their canned remarks. The debates are turning into one big joke.

His ability and willingness to say what needs to be said makes him OK by me. The fact that he has little to no chance (sadly) of being elected gives him the freedom to get out there and point fingers and say the things that the no one else can/will. You don't get people to wake up and get pissed about all the shit that's going on by gently tapping them on the shoulder, you do it by standing up and shouting in their faces. This party, this COUNTRY, needs more people who will stand up and speak the truth.

http://www.returningsoldiers.us/al.htm

Welcome to share!

I love this guy.

Sad really.

He is trying to strenghen our party and get us back to our core beliefs and I see nothing wrong with that.

Sharpton hasn't "sank in the polls". Do you just make this stuff up, or do you really believe what comes out of your mouth?

sad really

Why is that when Howard Dean criticizes other Democrats, he's simply a "straight shooter" who "tells it like it is" and is a huge asset to the Democratic Party worthy of near-worship, but when Al Shaprton criticizes other Democrats (especially the apparently untouchable Howard Dean) he's a divisive, race-baiting spolier, a "crybaby seeking attention?"

How is calling other candidates "Bushlite" any different from suggesting someone is an "Uncle Tom?"

who endorse white candidates "Toms".

"African-American leaders endorsing white candidates were not only targeted, they were also mocked by Sharpton: 'I’m endorsing so and so.' … you are not doing nothing but playing with yourself. These people are not discussing you; they need a few cosmetic pictures to add to their profile. I’m ready to put out ads telling all Uncle Toms at least send me part of the money you get from selling out because if I wasn’t in the race they wouldn’t be offering you nothing. I put a whole new generation of Toms in business."

There is an important missing section here that prevents us from knowing exactly what Sharpton said. No where in this quote does Sharpton refer to "white candidates." He may have been referring to "white candidates," but the reporter choose to leave that part out. I am willing to bet that he did not refer to "white candidates" and that that is why the reporter left it out. My guess is that he was referring to Republican candidates and that since almost all Republican candidates are white, the reporter made the leap for him. I would like to see the full unredacted transcript.

The comments on Ahnuld were right on.

n/t

he's pissed off that no elected black officials have shown him the respect he thinks he deserves by endorsing him.

he's definitely not talking about the republican party.

How do you know that he is pissed off that no black officials have endorsed him? Do you have any proof or is this just your opinion.

How do you know he was not talking about the Republican party? Did you attend the event where he gave the speach, have you read the full transcript or this just your opinion.

Do you have any proof that he was calling all black leaders who endorse any white candidate an Uncle Toms or is this just your opinion?

On Edit: I am pretty sure that Sharpton has endorsed white candidates on many occasions, so if he were calling black leaders who endorse white candidates Uncle Toms, he would be calling himself one. I don't think he is.

go ahead.

:dunce:

Democratic presidential candidate Al Sharpton launched a blistering attack on Howard Dean yesterday, accusing his rival of promoting an "anti-black agenda."

<snip>

He said his comments were in response to a news report yesterday that Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) plans to endorse Dean, the former Vermont governor and presumed front-runner for the 2004 Democratic nomination. Sharpton has had a long-standing rivalry with the congressman's father, Jesse L. Jackson, who twice ran for president.

"Any so-called African American leader that would endorse Dean despite his anti-black record is mortgaging the future of our struggle for civil rights and social justice," Sharpton said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31895-2003Oct28.html

I would like to see the full transcript from the "Toms" speech. Even if he is calling Jackson a "Tom" for endorsing Dean, that doesn't mean that he is calling all Blacks who endorse any what candidate "Toms."

…and mocking African-American leaders who endorse white candidates as a “whole new generation of (Uncle) Toms.”

http://www.msnbc.com/news/952445.asp#October30

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The article does NOT quote Sharpton accurately. Sharpton called someone “whole new generation of (Uncle) Toms.” but when it comes to who it is, the article paraphrases Al, but won't quote him

He's talking about the black leaders who are Republicans.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If they don't quote Sharpton how is it that you can so authoritatively state who he was talking about. IOW, what is making your opinion more valid than the opinion that he was speaking of white candidates?

and it's not the first time he's denounced black Republicans who endorse Republican politicians. We have a number of them here in NYC

But he's denounced people for supporting whites before as well. If you're judging by past history it could still go either way.

Personally, I believe that the man is full of crap either way because his past has shown that the only agenda for Al Sharpton is Al Sharpton.

he's denounced people for supporting whites before as well

And in all of those instances it was a Republican black endorsing a white Republican politician.

but the rhetoric that he used in the quote is often used to attack Black leaders who support Republicans.

If he was attacking Jessie Jackson Jr or all black leaders who endorse white candidates, then why did the reporter leave the part of the quote out that would allow us to judge for ourselves? Don't you agree that the part of the quote that indicates exactly whom he is talking about is very important? I believe that the reporter left this part out on purpose so that he could put his own words in Sharpton's mouth. Can you suggest a valid reason for leaving this part out?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Al Sharpton knows he isn't electable, which gives him teh luxury of unadulterated honesty. He can, and does, say what he feels, and, to tell you the truth, he's about 90% right on about most things.

Which things in particular? And in which era of his career?

He says the things that need to be said. He forces the Democrats to recognize Democratic principles and not just play 'us too just not as much' to Bush.

"Black leaders who endorse white candidate are a new generation of Toms" needs to be said? WTF? I think you're weed may be laced with something.

Your ignorance makes us intelligenct, informed cannabis users look bad. Some gullible people might think it's the weed's fault you're dense. Don't blame the weed.

Dude, let's not get into the weed here. And never misspell the word "intelligent" when questioning someone's intelligence. It makes it look like we weed users can't focus on detail.

:crazy:

100% wrong vs. 10% wrong...shaprtong doesn't seem bad compared to some

all of the democrats running have baggage but somehow only Sharptons matters. Like he said, if he had molested T Brawley rather than defending her, he could be governor of California.

The same assholes who post "Tawana Brawley n/t" and think that is an argument, will all show up on a abortion thread screaming about men's rights.

But there may be something to what your saying, LOL!!

I like what he says

but it looks like whatever medication he's been on for the last 9 months has worn off.

instead of reading a few cafefully chosen paragraphs, before jumping to any conclusions.

And I know what he's been saying for years. I have been as entertained by his candidacy as anyone else. But that doesn't change who he is. How many of us were going out of our way to hear what he has to say before he became a candidate? Mow many of us were surprised to find out how eloquent and intelligent he can really be? And now he's back to tilting at racial windmills for his own political gain. And calling legitimate, effective black leaders "Uncle Tom" for making a choice? You're prepared to defend this?

Did you see the speech? Have you read the transcipt. You assume he was talking about Jessie Jackson, Jr., but it doesn't say that in the article. I know that he was upset with Jackson for endorsing Dean, but until I have absolute proof, I will not believe that he called him an Uncle Tom. He could have easily been talking about Roy and Niger Inis and their ilk.

When I read the article more closely, I think you're absolutely right.

if you hadn't read the article closely?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=624339&mesg_id=624621

of our group here.

Where were these perfect people on Saturday? Where were the other candidates?

There were decent people there standing against the war. Where were the other candidates?

Al was there. He stood with us. We need more people from many diverse interests and backgrounds to stand with us against Bush and this war. Let the other side try to divide. Let's not help them. Stick up for the ones who stick up for you. Build coalitions. Unite!

Why? When did you come to this realization, that Al Sharpton is such a great liberal leader?

There were lots of candidates against the war. Not all of them are calling influention black leaders "a new generation of toms".

Some of those candidates work in this town.
My legs are still sore. Where were these perfect souls that you would represent?

I don't know which perfect souls you are referring to.

Where were the other candidates? Al was there when we stood up to be counted. How do you end a war? You take to the streets. Where were the other candidates when we needed them?

By the by. I am not endorsing Al for President.

I'm glad that Sharpton was there, but all of the candidates have a national stage on which to oppose the war, they don't really need to be at a demonstration, do they? I could very well be wrong.

One of the things that had seemed so impressive about Sharpton in this campaign was that he was actually elevating the level of discourse -- until now. Can anybody really imagine having a president who calls people "uncle Toms?" It was unnacceptable when directed at Colin Powell, it's unacceptable now. It's unacceptable.

Bye, Al. Thanks for what you've done to this point. We'll take it from here.

Dressed up real good, that is. Armani. black gold, Texas T.

You think Black congressional leaders who support white candidates are 'Uncle Tom's'? Like Jesse Jackson Jr.?

from an earlier post, seems easier to paste it here:

The US population is extremely marginalized, effectively to the same extent of some countries in Africa and South America, among other places, where you have a small wealthy elite controlling a huge % of all resources, including political power.

While the US did end legalized racial apartheid a few decades ago, the mores and AOB (attitude opinion belief) curve hangs on, with the result that non-whites still earn about 80 cents for every dollar earned by white people, and ethnic minorities are over-represented in the ranks of the poor.

Voters are almost exclusively the top 25% income tier, and when politicians do anything to "help" anybody, naturally they are going to focus on the interests of those with the discretionary resources to donate, volunteer, vote, etc.

More importantly, the corporate oligarchy who funds the campaigns in both branches of the party would be acting against its own best interests if the status quo were not maintained.

Feudalism is undeniably extremely popular for the Landlord, and it is not realistic to suppose that he will choose to have less profit out of altruism or in the interests of the long-term safety of you and your family.

All this adds up to the fact that neither party has done jackshit for ethnic minorities or low income people since the Voting Rights Act was passed, nor are they likely to, and the only reason that anyone other than a white affluent person with a limited knowledge of reality would endorse any of the bushlites is out of blatant, Uncling, brownnose self-aggrandizement.

The average apartment rent is now almost, according to the government's figures, almost 4 times the minimum wage.

No bushlite is going to multiply the minimum wage by 5 instantly, nor impose a national rent ceiling. Even their "health care" plans are mostly window dressing, and not relevant to a single mom who can afford a total of $00.00 for health care for herself and her children.

It is not realistic to expect bushlites and their supporters to take the long view, or reason that huge masses of desperately poor people with nothing to lose is not in their best interests, or that Rwanda West might not be the best legacy they could leave to their grandchildren.

It is not because the candidates are white, but because what they propose is essentially yet another rewording of press releases outlining the accessorized for fall status quo.

That has been done, and done again, with the result that today, a political solution to the current crisis is no longer a realistic possibility.

Not just "black congressional leaders" but anyone who endorses the status quo, does so either out of misguided, misinformed magical thinking, or because they perceive some personal benefit to themselves.

It is just a fact of life that even African-Americans affluent and well-connected enough to get to Congress are more likely to have less of a disconnect between their perceptions and reality. That is not to say that they are inherently more intelligent, or intended as white-bashing.

For example, a while back there was a white candidate who advocated a Living Wage, and was immediately denounced as unelectable.

That is one kind of reality, and it is the reality that the affluent understand, regardless of their race.

The reality that most do NOT understand is that the LACK of a Living Wage is an express route to Rwanda. Not the only one, by any means, but one of the most popular.

Jesse Jackson,Jr, for all the privilege he has had, knows that, or if he doesn't know it, has less of an excuse for not knowing it than does, for example, Howard Dean.

I get the sinking feeling people on DU haven't been exposed to many Black people who are more interested in telling it like it is, than trying to make them feel comfortable.

Remember Harry Belafonte called Colin a "house servant"... while the meaning of the label had to be explained to many non-blacks, lots of Black people read it and laughed in agreement.

I think there is less ignorance, no beyond ignorance, inability to comprehend, the reality of the "masses." in Malawi than in the US.

All that highly touted "grass roots" support that the moneyed candidates are so proud of sprouted up out of some mighty upscale manicured grass.

It is disingenuous, not to mention dishonest to pretend that the concerns of a suburban-dwelling, focaccia-eating, office-working, shinycar-driving systems analyst or attorney or marketing director have any overlap with the concerns of a single mom working 2 and a half minwages so she can pay rent.

The tragedy is, that the one interest they DO have in common; namely that both want their kids to grow up in a place that is unlike Rwanda or the slums of Sao Paolo, the herd of elephants thundering inexorably across the living room to the chair you are in, continues to be ignored, year after year, decade after decade - and why?

Like so many questions that begin with "why" these days, because rich men want more money.

dfong63 said that the "toms" remark was not exactly what one would call presidential. DuctapeFatwa reply that using the unvarnished truth is not presidential and that it needs to be dress up. Since it has not been established the Sharpton was refering to Jackson or any other Black congressional leader, your quetion is a straw man.

I expect better from you.

the fact that many of Sharpton's detractors insist that he is unelectable precisely because he is seen as "unpresidential?" So why should anyone be surprised if he says "unpresidential" things?

Where does Sharpton call JJJ a tom? Kinda hard to use the articles provided which paste unrelated comments in a seamless way to make them appear related. Is this a technique that you would use as editor?

By the way WilliamPitt, do you believe there is such an animal as a tom?

I got a pretty good idea of what my parents meant when they used the term. I saw the movie, Uncle Tom's Cabin' as a child with my mother at a theater across from the White House and I still carry the images with me. My parents were proud middle-class blacks who achieved incredible successes in a rough world. They told me of their struggles to overcome the handicap of their race(at that time), and the detractors were often other blacks who perpetuated the domination of the ruling-class by doing their bidding. There would be blacks who were hired just to keep other blacks in line. There were other 'token' blacks who were hired to fill a quota, not an integral part of the organization; with little chance for advancement. And, there were the snitches who would spy on other blacks. There were those who would lie on their brothers for a price. There seems to be an endless supply of these people. There are plenty of blacks who will kiss up to a white establishment for a price, and take up George Wallace's place, blocking the door to opportunity of change. Who will speak out about these hired shills who have no regard for any, save their manipulating benafactors. What will we call these traitors to progress?

Is 'tom' really a term that whites can fully relate to?

I want to say no. Not that whites are too dumb to understand what 'tom' means. Rather our experiences could be influencing our view of what got under his skin and made him lash out. Harder still to tell with the material provided.

I would be less quick to jump down the throat of any of our candidates over something the press says they said. They are completely misleading the public as to the state of the union. They smeared Al on this one and we're falling for it.

Maybe in your rightwing world, but not in the one the rest of us inhabit. Powell is a Tom and Rice is a Tomasina. What have EITHER of them done for Black people? Not a damn' thing. But they sure have sucked up to some of the worst honkies around.

I love Aaron McGruder.

"Uncle Tom" is an insult that is especially repulsive because it calls someone out on his race. It's no different than Jungle Bunny or Spear Chucker and frankly, I'm shocked that there are DUers who are defending the term. I thought we were a little more enlightened around here.

Because it attacks politics, not race. If it attacked race, then every Black person would be a Tom/asina. But that's not the case, is it.

'Enlightened' means recognising a pillock when you meet it on the road.

should think more about it. It is void of any meaning if it is not applied to someone of a certain race. If Dean called Al Sharpton an Uncle Tom, Sharpton would be calling Dean a racist in a minute. The term is racist because it applies to, relies on, and diminishes based on skin color. Those who fail to recognize it as such are unenlightened.

when he already speaks for them? :-)

"Tom" is not a racist epithet because it not based on race; It's based on a person's behavior towards others of their own race. White people can be "Toms" also, though it's not a common practice to use it on whites.

Why is it their job to specifically single out blacks to help? I take exception to all the Tom comments because it assumes that to every black, the overriding concern in their life should be the fact that they are black and that they can't actually value other concerns higher than their race. If whites can do it, so can anyone.

Uncle Tom was a slave served his master at the expense of other slaves because it served his other interests. I believe that Sharpton was refering to black leaders who endorse Republicans. I also think that Sharpton believes that the Republicans are working against black people in the country.

If Sharpton WAS refering to those who endorse Republicans and he does believe that the Republicans are working against black people, then he is right to feel that they are selling out the black community.

Thankfully Sharpton doesn't have the "good taste" to keep his mouth shut!

http://www.commondreams.org/views/090800-106.htm

decide for yourself

http://msnbc.com/news/952445.asp?0cv=CB20

Sharpton’s dismay over Jackson’s endorsement of Dean goes much deeper th(a)n some comments made on CNN. Jackson was one of the architects of Sharpton’s presidential platform. Jackson also allowed his communications director, Frank Watkins, to be Sharpton’s campaign manager. But Watkins left the Sharpton campaign because of structural disagreements and financial reasons. Watkins has since returned to Jackson’s office.

==========

Plus, you would imagine Sharpton thought it was a sure bet that major black leaders like JJJr would endorse him. No doubt Al saw the Dean endorsement as a major slap in the face.

You're agrument is based on the assumption that Sharpton is running to win the DNC nomination. He has already stated that that is not the case. He has said in the past that he is running to "Slap the Donkey."

Since he is not really running for the nomination, it is only natural for him to assume that black leaders would support other candidates. Sharpton seems to have a problem with Dean. I am not sure of the substance of his accusations that Dean has been anti-black, but if Sharpton truly believes this, then it is only natural that he would be upset with a black leader who endorsed him.

That is ridiculous!

You think Sharpton's charge came out of the blue? It followed on the heels of Jackson's announcement to endorse Dean. Obvious cause and effect - Sharpton lashed out in response. His ego was wounded and he is acting out.

That is not to say Sharpton doesn't have assets, but he should've continued his mission for the party's sake and directed the debate away from character assasination - as he adviced others to take the higher road. It only is going to come around to kick Sharpton and create greater divisiveness.

Charging Jesse Jackson Jr of being an "Uncle Tom" is as low as it goes and pretty much destroys Sharpton's credibility for anything.

There is no evidence that that Sharpton was lashing out at Jackson or that he was even upset that Jackson did not endorse him. There is no evidense that Sharpton called Jackson an Uncle Tom.

If you look at the substance of what he wrote you will see where he says, "These people are not discussing you; they need a few cosmetic pictures to add to their profile." To me, I think that this is clear that he is refering to Black Leaders who support Republicans.

And Duer's are falling for it.

The articles are linking the tom quote to the remarks about Dean. Maybe some here are also. Fine. But, show me where he calls JJJ a tom. Don't just smear the man by linking phrases together as the article seamlessly did. Look at the way they blended the different statements together to make it appear that he was referring to all black endorsers.

He was making the argument, not a convincing one, that Blacks have benefited from his efforts. He has put himself on the line for many causes that will, if successful, benefit many. But he was stretching it a bit.

Still, one can argue that any breakthrough candidacy can elevate other breakthrough candidacies.

If it can be shown, as opposed to supposed, that he he called JJJr a Tom, then I will eat my words, but I am willing to bet that when we see the quote in its true context that it will clearly show that this is not what he said.

That he has changed his positions on numerous issues, including AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, and all toward the more liberal positions. Please admit that that might cause SOME people to question his sincerity.

I think Sharpton's attack hurts Dean, and hurts our party if Dean (or Sharpton) is our nominee. But it accomplishes what Sharpton has stated all along was his goal: to hold the party accountable, and to "slap the donkey" so that it stays left. He is representing his community, and he's doing it strongly.

DTH

That he has changed his positions on numerous issues, including AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, and all toward the more liberal positions. Please admit that that might cause SOME people to question his sincerity.

Why does it not matter WHEN? Why does it not matter that all of the candidate have switched positions, some more recently than others? Why do we automatically assume that if a person changed their mind THE RIGHT WAY, it's only for political gain and not because they STOPPED looking for political gain? 25 years ago Gephardt voted with republicans 85% of the time, and I don't begrudge him that. Not two years ago, Kucinich ACTUALLY VOTED against reproductive rights, and I don't begrudge him that.

Question his sincerity all you want, but the fact that you question it is worthless if you don't apply it evenly.

And no one HAS to have a reason to not like Dean. People don't have to fabricate character issues. You can JUST NOT LIKE a candidate. This is what happens when you have random conversations with random people about random topics.

I think Sharpton's attack hurts Dean, and hurts our party if Dean (or Sharpton) is our nominee. But it accomplishes what Sharpton has stated all along was his goal: to hold the party accountable, and to "slap the donkey" so that it stays left. He is representing his community, and he's doing it strongly.

And we don't question his sincerity, even though almost a year has passed and this is the first time he said Dean's platform was "Anti-Black". No need to question that. Nah, wait until a black leader ENDORSES him, that's the better time. And he's not holding THE PARTY accountable at all. His criticism was focused. And apparently, a lot of Uncle Toms are pissed right now. Insulted. Humiliated because they don't have a national stage on which to defend themselves.

I don't know where or how big Sharpton's community is, but his words obviously do not represent the whole black community.

When Kerry says he's against the war, you whine about "He voted for IWR. A vote for IWR was a vote for war!" and nothing about how happy you are that Kerry changed his position. You don't ask "Why do we automatically assume that if a person changed their mind THE RIGHT WAY, it's only for political gain?"

But when it's Dean, it's "Why do we automatically assume that if a person changed their mind THE RIGHT WAY, it's only for political gain?" The answer is "We're just following the example you helped to set"

And we don't question his sincerity, even though almost a year has passed and this is the first time he said Dean's platform was "Anti-Black".

Nice way to question his sincerity while denying that you don't question his sincerity, while hiding behind the pronoun "we" ("we don't question his sincerity" - you might want to read some of the other posts in this thread)

And apparently, a lot of Uncle Toms are pissed right now. Insulted. Humiliated because they don't have a national stage on which to defend themselves.

What are you talking about? As long as there's an RNC, those toms will have a national stage. They have a garaunteed seat at every RNC convention.

on a spectum of issues 10 years ago? How about last week?

There is real dirt to pull out against Sharpton to slap that donkey from here to kingdom come.

He opened Pandora's box. He is finished.

.

It is not so much about defending Dean as defending Jesse Jackson Jr. - no matter how much Sharpton tries to make it about Dean. Don't you think had Jackson endorsed any of the other candidates, Sharpton wouldn't be dissing them? This isn't about Dean.

Some endorsement for your candidate

just go to Google and do a search on "flip flop" along with any candidate's name. You find something on each one, even Clark, and even Sharpton.

I'm so pissed off, I can't stop myself from lying and slandering.


‘NEW GENERATION OF TOMS’
Sharpton made some of his most inflammatory remarks of this campaign season Thursday night, disparaging front-runner Dean’s record on race issues and mocking African-American leaders who endorse white candidates as a “whole new generation of (Uncle) Toms.”

Support a white candidate, become a race-traitor. Sure, Al.

A BLAST AT SCHWARZENEGGER
Sharpton even found time to attack the governor-elect of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger. “I defend a young girl and you act like it’s a scandal. I guess if I had fondled her and her girlfriends you would have made me the governor of California,” said Sharpton in reference to reporters who question his actions during the Tawana Brawley rape hoax in the 1980s.

He didn't 'defend a young girl', he in fact did engage in a scandal, accusing the governor of being in bed with organized crime, being on the team that suggested it had something to do with the IRA, and Sharpton said that to cooperate with the state Attorney General Robert Abrams, a Jew, would be "to sit down with Mr. Hitler".

He is a one-man clown school, adored by suckers and the easily misled.

I've changed my signature line in your honor.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It doesn't surprise me that you try to impune my comprehesion of your bullshit.

It doesn't surprise me that you try to impune my comprehesion of your bullshit.

Your post directly implied that I had somehow, magically, assassinated the character of Sharpton. I did nothing of the sort, as I was relying on his quotes. This fact was lost to you, and I commented upon that.

I don't expect you to understand that, but go ahead and substantiate where I assissinated Sharpton's character.

In case it escaped your distinctly flimsy grasp on proper word usage, it's not bullshit to use someone's own quotes to describe them.

Step on up.

"He is a one-man clown school, adored by suckers and the easily misled."

name calling plain and simple


BTW, I think he's funny, so fucking what.

so much for all your big talk

That's were he linked to when I last discussed Sharpton with him.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

when you have to resort to shit like this it's time to give up

When they're being dishonest, I remark on it.

When you can't tolerate the correction of purposefully stated error and mischaraterization, you become that much less relevant.

And you're right, it was OJ. I guess that makes it OK to promote Holocaust denial websites.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The site I linked to wasn't the source, it was the repository.

The source quoted was Vicent Bugliosi, not known for his National Socialist leanings.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

but I expected as much from you

when his point is racism, anti-semitism and basically being a loud-mouthed, publicity-hungery charlatan, what you expect is of little importance or worth.

very funny

your name fits you well

there are several KKK sympathizers, if not outright members, sitting in congress...and assorted "southern patiriots" in bush, inc.
when sharpton is among them, as in: HE HAS THE SAME POWER that they do, i'll take the hysteria about his "race-baiting" seriously.

If the other people you mention were the topic, I'd be just as stringent and intolerant of their viewpoints as well, and you know that. But they're not. The subject is their equivalent, only outside the halls of elected office.

One has only to review the record and it easy to see that little enough research is needed to proffer copious amounts of information that, at the very least, indicate the man is an inflammatory, race-baiting, self-absorbed hater.

That he is not in office doesn't excuse this.
That he is of a particular pigmentation doesn't excuse this.
That such events may be 20 years old doesn't excuse this.
That others in power may harbor similar racist mindsets doesn't excuse this.
That he has never, ever stepped up and taken responbility doesn't excuse this.
That he is attempting to portray himself differently now doesn't excuse this.

you failed to mention the difference between the power of an al sharpton vs. the power of a trent lott or john ashcroft...the difference is glaringly obvious...at least to me. yeah, sharpton is the equivalent of a lott or an ahscorft...is that what YOU reall believe? really? whatthefuckever...race-baiting certainly wasn't invented by sharpton, nor does he have the power to enact of enforce its most damaging manifestations. no matter how much you try...you can never equate the impact of a sharpton to a lott. such is the nature of the american beast.

But the topic is Sharpton.

you failed to mention the difference between the power of an al sharpton vs. the power of a trent lott or john ashcroft...the difference is glaringly obvious...at least to me.

The reason I didn't mention it is because it's irrelevant here and, as you point out, it's obvious. You're not stupid, so I didn't point it out.

yeah, sharpton is the equivalent of a lott or an ahscorft...is that what YOU reall believe? really? whatthefuckever...

How about actually reading what I stated? As in The subject is their equivalent, only outside the halls of elected office. Ergo, he doesn't have the power that they have, but he exhibits the same tendencies and characteristics.

race-baiting certainly wasn't invented by sharpton, nor does he have the power to enact of enforce its most damaging manifestations.

No one is claiming he invented it, so what's you point? As for the power, he is a media figure, and therefore an influence, regardless of whether to the same degree as those media figures with political power. As such, his statements and actions make him a profoundly immoral man.

no matter how much you try...you can never equate the impact of a sharpton to a lott. such is the nature of the american beast.

I didn't ever try to equate their impact, now did I?

really? sharpton is going exactly nowhere, and we all know why. hint: it has nothing to do with his past, or race-baiting, or any other such nonsense. the point is: power. shaprton only has the power to piss off a few neo-conservatives.

he framed an innocent man. It was the act of an evil bastard that deserves no respect. Al is a great speaker, that almost always stands up for the right things. Besides that one act, he has been exemplary. But that was unforgiveable.

was lying?

If s/he did, s/he's be running to the DA. You can bank on that.

The jury found Sharpton liable for making seven defamatory statements about Pagones (district attorney), Maddox for two and Mason for one on a series of radio appearances.

Al pushed the story too far. He accused the whole bunch of raping Brawley. But man, I've much worse slander from Al's detractors here and elsewhere. He pushed in defense of this woman and he went too far. He paid in court for it. But nowhere does the court say that Al knew that Brawley's claims were false

This was in Al's neighborhood. He reacted like I would want an activist to act. With passion.

And he wasn't the only one who believed Brawley. Bill Cosby marched in defense of her.

And others:

http://www.workers.org/ww/brawley.html
On April 4, family adviser the Rev. Al Sharpton, singer-activist Pete Seeger and nine other defendants were sentenced to 15 days in jail on disorderly conduct charges after they took part in a large protest in support of Brawley at the State Capitol in Albany. There was also a big march, mostly of women, in midtown Manhattan, in support of Brawley.

The case hasn't dissappeared. Brawley still insists that she was raped. No testimony was heard from the medics who treated Brawley for her injuries after she was found near death.

"snip"

"Reopen the investigation into the Tawana Brawley case. That’s the message Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois has reportedly sent to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. New York filmmaker Curt Stewart says the senator issued the request after he sent her a copy of his new documentary on the Brawley case, which is called "Is Justice a Joke?"

Stewart told reporters he has found evidence that supports Brawley. Stewart says he has found the medics who treated Brawley and that they confirm her injuries. The medics, who never got to testify, are still willing to appear in court, according to Stewart.

Does it seem inexplicable that the grand jury did not hear testimony from the medics? The "investigation" into the crimes against Brawley was such a sham that supporters maintain it was a calculated and extensive cover-up.

"snip"

for Sharpton?

What about "Blacks/Otherwise for Sharpton.......What the Hell is going on here. Sharpton speaks to immigrants, the biggest new influx in America and we are looking for "Others" to vote for? Give me a break here.

Immigration to America is at the biggest high since some of our "Grandparents" came to America....and we can't find a Candidate to express our NEEDS?

Mr Sharpton is more African than American in the same way that David Duke is more European than American.Both are mentally living in the 70's.They bait and fight imaginary ghosts in the hope that America will return to its (more)racist roots.Any white person who supports him has the self esteem of a black person who supports Duke.

This white gals self esteem is just fine, thankyouverymuch.

I don't agree with him on all his stands, but guess what? Surprise! I don't with the most of the white folks running, either.

Al has been doing a great deal of the heavy lifting during this campaign regarding Bush and for that he has my gratitude.

On edit:

As for those "ghosts" you claim Sharpton is chasing, tell that black gentleman in Texas who was decapitated and the black gentleman who had a broom shoved up his ass those were "ghosts" doing it.

Racism is alive and well in this country.

this incident, and all that ballooned out of it, only serves to divide Democrats by racial and cultural lines.

This is our greatest risk--that our undoing will be because we are divided, battling between ourselves and destroying our own chances by knifing each other in the back.

Sharpton overstepped it by allowing his ego to dominate. He is forever branded as unqualified due to his infantile reaction.

WHile I agree that Sharpton is far and away the most entertaining of the Democratic candidates, I'm real concerned about charges of anti-Semitism that I think are founded:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2089153/

That's a dealbreaker in my book.

Two men's opinions. Nothing more.

here's one of the authors (William Saletan)on Gore

http://politics.slate.msn.com/?id=2069005
Gore's message was all about us and them. Republicans were sinister, he implied:

I really think he has moved towards correcting his former stance by understanding how he had been antiSemitic in the past.

The reason why I don't support him more is because of his friendliness with Moon at one time. So, I pretty much avoid talking about Sharpton now.