Excuse me, but the Democratic Party has always included bigots in the Big Tent.

How the heck do you think we held the South for so long???? ANd we still got the Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts through Congress.

The one-time inclusion of McGlurkin in the faith and family tour was meant to curry favor with black ministers, who are critical to electoral success in South Carolina. Getting Black voters to the polls in SC is critical and political infrastructure is the key. It may be ugly and coarse but there is a good chance that it was done to keep Black ministers out of flocking to the Hillary bandwagon far more than it was to an appeal to bigots. . Given Obama's overall voting record, I think he deserves some benefit of the doubt. Don't think for a second there was not considerable political calculus going on. I am not defending it. Just saying people need to stop demagoguing the issue.

I am not not justifying anyone or anything. I am just explaining the FACT that two things you don't really want to see how it they are made is Sausage and political bedfellows.


It it no different than Bill Clinton signing DOMA in order to shore up support for Dem Congressman in tough districts. It took away the "Dems are anti-family" demagoguery and was far more reprehensible than this one time inclusion of a bigot in an event that most voters IN SOUTH CAROLINA have long forgotten.

the highly charged and public protests were ignored this time. I don't recall a bigot ever being allowed to speak his own bigotry at a Democratic event either.

the list is very long.

all the way until 1980.

but even bigots can agree with Progressive on a whole variety of issues. I woupld rather have them voting with us on 90% of the issues and oppoing them on ten percent.

ON EDIT: and thats one of the reasons he won't be our candidate in 2008.

those assholes anymore. I wouldn't bring them up to defend the McClurkin incident, unless you want comparisons made between them and Obama.

That's like saying, "The U.S. used to have slavery. Therefor, if African-Americans are disenfranchised in the South today by various means that's perfectly acceptable because it is fitting with a long tradition of American racism."

Democrats sucessfully confronted racial bigotry in the south starting in 1954 and it took a generation to get the votr and another to sieze power. We convinced bigots that they had to change rather than shunning them from the party altogether.

The Dems lost the south a long time ago over this issue. Red through and through. I say leave them there. Let them come to us in regret and till then forget the bigotted south. They are all Repubs now anyway. We have to flip the south to blue by making it pro-civil rights not by becoming more moderate.

Bigots caucuesd with liberals to effect great change in the South.

That is a dead era of history never to rise again.

Unbelievable. Those days are gone, those days when a black man or woman of any color, couldn't have run an enormously successful presidential campaign.

I am just explaining the reality of southern politics. Bigotry of one sort or another will always be present. The question is whether or not McGlurkin's inclusion was an appeal to that bigotry.

very public and highly controversial appeal to bigotry, (or use of a bigot to pander for votes.) I thought he was divisive in his attempts to turn this primary into a generational war, I'm furious that he's labeled our two term battle with the neocons, "food fights" but he lost my vote because of the way he handled the McClurkin situation.

be summarily dismissed. I would feel differnetly if he had McGlurkin by his side autnd had him opening rallyies for him, but this was a one time instance.


As for the foodfight with the Neocons...I don't dioagree, But to be blunt about it our congressional leadership has treated it as a food fight for the last 8 years rather than the very dangerous and insidious set of policies that they are.

Funny thing about those "one time instances"....when a politician shows himself so eager to pander to bigots as Obama did with his "ex-gay" clown friend in South Carolina, that was plenty enough to show me what kind of man he is and he lost my vote that night. As well as a lot of other votes.

outrageous homophobes, and the gospel tour went on for several days. I'm not dismissing his voting record,and I don't think Obama's a bigot himself, but his reaction to all the protests was so tone deaf, so cold and arrogantly unyielding, that I have to wonder if he'll use this same tactic when it comes to other issues.

/ I should add that allowing McClurkin to MC, just by itself was the deal breaker for me.

that would have played out?

could have come out ahead by dropping McClurkin. I really do. He's able to move a crowd with his oratory, and I think he could have pulled it off. But in the end it doesn't matter. He should have done it anyway.

I find your attitude and arrogance offensive...And certainly doesn't sound Democratic to me.

Also I meant that all the bigots are repubs.

Not that all are bigotted. People like yourself are the only to bring the south on board. In 2004 there was a lot of talk of a Southern Strategy. AKA "be more moderate". i think that is wrong. I want to populate the south with liberals and then fight for the vote, not give a wink and a nudge to the racists to win the south. That is what I was saying.

Forget it. It has absolutely nothing to do with nothing except Hillary Is a Diva!!!!!!!!

A Diva, who's worked her ass off all her life.