Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Dave — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:45:17 GMT

Good job John! Clinton has alot of experience - of REWRITING HISTORY! No shame from the Clinton's! I do not want dishonest people in the White House, especially our President! All people are included in Obama's Hope and Vision message. Whereas the Clinton's are working the Rove/Washington D.C. PLAYBOOK TO A 'T'. VOTE FOR OBAMA! BY THE WAY, I AM A WHITE MALE AND AM OFFENDED BY THE CLINTON'S COMMENTS!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Mike — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:51:53 GMT

Time for some more tears Hillary.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

PLB — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:53:46 GMT

You have to love Senator Edwards....To call like it is

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Typical Edwards, SC — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:04:39 GMT

Is that John Edwards pandering to blacks and making comments to help Obama? He sure is a snake oil salesman who knows how to kiss and where to kiss.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Lynn — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:05:41 GMT

Well, I guess now we'll be hearing from the Clinton campaign about how the guys are "ganging up" on her again . . ..

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Paul Walker, Germantown, TN — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:18:00 GMT

I can fully understand Mr. Edward's feeling & position.
Now is one of those time when it is best to let your opponet self distruct all on their very own.
If or when Hillary ever talkes about her "experience" and "knowledge" she cannot but help putting her foot into her mouth.
Let 'er go. she is doing just fine all by herself and does not need any help.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Marbw — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:18:14 GMT

Right on JRE, HRC's words would probably even offend LBJ. Many Americans(not just the AA community) were offended by HRC's words.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Eyzwidopn — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:27:14 GMT

The pattern continues...

There's coincidence and then there's an unmistakable pattern that the black community obviously would be more sensitive to than the white community.

1) Emails forwarded by HRC staffers suggesting Obama is a Muslim
2) Shaheen raising Obama's teen drug use and suggesting Obama may be accused of being a drug dealer
3) Mark Penn using "cocaine" on national TV as he referred to Obama's drug use following Shaheens's comments
4) Kerrey's repeated use of Obama's middle name and "madrassa" on national TV
5) HRC stating that it took LBJ, a white President, to fulfill MLK's and the Civil Right's Movements' dream
6) a HRC staffer suggesting people want Obama as an "imaginary hip black friend" as reported in The Guardian
7) Cuomo's "shuck and jive" line
8) Bill referring to Obama, a grown 46-year-old man, as "kid" which associates too closely to black men being called "boy"
9) Bill referencing Obama's campaign for POTUS as unqualified, too risky, a roll of the dice, etc.
10) HRC charging that Obama was giving people "false hope" and that Obama, with an accomplished resume, is not ready to lead.

I think separately these issues can be considered harmless but there have been too many of them and too many have been presented in a negative context.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Jennifer Anderson, Houston Texas — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:27:29 GMT

It's good to see John Edwards getting some coverage - I thought Chuck Todd had made a unilateral decision for all of America that the Democratic nominees were officially down to just Hillary and Obama. I'm waiting for my turn to vote for John Edwards.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

John M., San Diego, CA — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:29:26 GMT

Call it like it is Edwards! I hope you and Obama see eye to eye on the need to end this corrupt Clinton campaign.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

diane — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:38:45 GMT

Edwards is well aware that Hillary is playing a dangerous game of racial politics and then trying to pin the blame on Obama.
Cnn showed a clip of Obama answering a question regarding this and then, cut to Hillary who was doing a rally and was outright lying to the audience about Obama and JFK and MLK

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:42:47 GMT

I'd say they are all wrong. There was never any "switch" that was flipped by one person. There were without a doubt, individuals who crystalized the concepts of equality, but for those who opposed it, the change in ones' viewpoint remained driven in. Some are still actively opposed, some have softened somewhat, and some have had an epiphany and become enlightened. There still is bias, sadly, that might always be. But there has been change. The youth of the World, are always the hope of the future. The continuation of that belief in equality for all, will forever rest with them.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Young Lee — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:44:45 GMT

If "real change has never started in Washington," then why is John Edwards running for President? He does realize that the White House is in Washington, right?

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

jef — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:46:27 GMT

Black Entertainment Network founder Bob Johnson is justifiably hammering Obama for allowing his campaign to unfairly distort Clinton's words. Johnson said, "Barack knows better than that, why he would let his people let that come out just shows to me either he is not in control of what they are saying or he's allowing them to say it knowing it's wrong."" American's won't stand for four years of race baiting antics such as this from Obama.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Robert — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:52:48 GMT

Well, even if Obama ends up the nominee, I do feel Edwards is burning some political bridges. He just seems to be going for broke about now. GO OBAMA!!!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Phoenix — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:57:14 GMT

Who really cares what Edwards thinks. He is toast anyway.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Steve, Los Angeles, CA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:00:12 GMT

Edwards is so desperate. This is a fight between Hillary and Obama. It has nothing to do with him. However, Edwards just has to inject himself into the fray because he thinks it makes him relevant.

Note to Edwards: It's not working.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

jeffim, miami — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:06:30 GMT

'present' vote = status quo

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Frank Owens, Nashville TN — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:14:48 GMT

Hillary is depending on two things. First, she's hoping that blacks aren't paying attention to her racist comments, and that they vote for her in similar numbers they did for her husband in '90s. Second, she's hoping poor whites, who by their nature are racist, will also vote her. Very weird coalition.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Garrett, Seattle — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:16:02 GMT

Obama! Wake up! This is only going to help Hillary in the long run...and this primary clearly depends on the "long run". Why help Hil? Because few people actually think that she is racist or racially insensitive. In fact, most people believe she will be a champion of black causes. This current issue may rile up a few people for a while, but when it comes down to it, there is going to be a much bigger "people are picking on Hillary, again!" backlash. And I hope your campaign learned in New Hampshire what happens when she appears picked on. You need to come out NOW and say publicly and in person that you don't think Hillary is racially insensitive and that you think her comments were taken out of context. It will help you be the better man on this issue, it's a presidential thing to do, and it's also the right thing to do. Don't worry about it helping Hillary. It won't.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Sean, Seattle — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:31:44 GMT

'present' vote = the way politics is played in most statehouses when a "poison pill" bill is up for vote.

Course, Hillary supporters can be excused for not knowing that, since "their girl" only has 6 years of elective experience.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:32:06 GMT

Edwards is such a loser. Sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong and coming to Obama's aid let again.

Shouldn't Edwards be picking out a shower gift for his friend Ms. Hunter?

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Robert Carreira, Tombstone, Arizona — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:34:13 GMT

I haven't seen the verbatim transcript, but this story reports she said, "King's dream was realized when Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964." Now I'm no fan of Hillary; in fact, of all the candidates on both sides, she's my least favorite. But if "King's dream was realized when Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964" is an accurate characterization of what she said, then this is historically accurate and does not seem to minimize MLK's achievements in any way. What MLK and others who are politically and socially active sought to do was to effect societal change, including public policy change. Consider this analogy: It is historically accurate to say civil rights leaders sought to change segregation laws, and they were indeed successful in doing this, starting with Brown v. Board. Acknowledging that the Supreme Court handed down the Brown decision does not, in any way, minimize the contributions of Thurgood Marshall (then the young NAACP lawyer who argued the case in front of the court), or of the NAACP as a whole. It seems those condemning Hillary -- again, if this story carries an accurate account -- are simply playing the politics-as-usual game and, for the conservatives, are condemning Hillary using the same lofty standards of political correctness they likely condemn others for using, casting blame for breaking any of the eggshells upon we they demand we all walk in our use of language. And again, I am no fan of Hillary, but critics would do better assailing her on substantive issues.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

RealB.G. — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:39:47 GMT

Let's be clear the heat on the Clinton's is from the independent members of the African American community. I watched Hillary try to re-write history with Tim and I can't believe he let her get away with it. The concern about her comments started with Donna Brazile and Con. Clyburn. Both are neutral and spoke up because both Bill and Hillary have used coded language and gone too far. They are not the only people in the African American community angry. She is sending a message to the we hate Sharpton/O.J./Jackson white folks to win the White House. She found her voice and it the bigotry of entitlement.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

S.K.M. Mass — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:39:50 GMT

Jef, Jeffim of Miami, whatever tags that you use,
The media is the one that has been reporting on Hillary Clinton's campaign and its many blunders. Barack Obama doesn't run the media, he runs his own campaign which stayed out of it for the most part. The only times when anyone involved with his campaign brought up race was when Jesse Jackson Jr. was asking about why Clinton cried when her campaign was in trouble, then said she cried because she's so concerned about the country, and why she never cried for reasons such as Katrina, horrible disasters, etc. etc. etc.. He's right to point that out, HRC's emotional-moment was all about her campaign floundering. If you don't think so, just watch the second half of that video when she's going on about how "some are right and some are wrong, some are ready to lead and some are not", etc. Although, Jesse Jackson Jr. wasn't commenting on the MLK/LBJ issue, and he made those comments AFTER Hillary enraged the African-American community. To say that Obama is race-baiting is either a sign of dishonesty or a lack of relevant information.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

jan , lebanon — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:41:10 GMT

Why are you voting for Hillary is it because of 35 years of experience being married to Bill Clinton.
Without a record and a record keeper politics becomes the realm of the liars and the best liar gets away with victory by confusing the voters.
The mistake of Obama is to believe in the intelligence of the voters, in their ability to remember who the Clintons are and what they stand for.
Obama is really a bound man, he cannot point to the obvious he cannot but her in her place as he would if she was a guy, and it is actually not fare of him to compete with her.
You cannot win against Children and manipulative woman because they can defeat you with a single tear drop.
Obama please just drop out and let us vote for Mcpain in the general election because you cannot win against tears and smears.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

S.K.M. Mass — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:45:23 GMT

Robert Carreira of Tombstone Arizona,
First off, Tombstone is a real place! That's awesome, I loved the movie when I was a kid! Um, anyways. Secondly, it was how she described it. She said MLK gave great speeches(like Obama), but it took a president(LBJ, or in her mind.. herself) to make it happen. It was stupid, she apologized, but they still kept trying to press their point that Obama lacks action.. even though Obama has done more in the Senate than HRC did(if you disclude her vote for authorizing the use of force against Iraq). To go further, the MLK/LBJ flap was really part of a larger series of missteps and misstatements. Eyzwidopen above listed most of the reasons that have drawn together the perception that HRC's campaign is just.. well, at the very least foolish if not worse.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Linda R., Bloomington, IN — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:48:00 GMT

Very interesting comment from Robert Carreira, Tombstone. If it is true, then I agree - a mountain has been made from nothing. Does anyone have the transcript?

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

The Truth — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:00:05 GMT

Jeffim, Miami wrote: 'present' vote = status quo

Jeffim, and everyone else who peddles this trash, every time you mention this, you expose your own ignorance and remind people of the lows to which the Clinton campaign went last weekend.

If you're not aware, Planned Parenthood has REPEATEDLY said that they asked Senator Obama to vote that way in order TO PROTECT WOMEN's RIGHT TO CHOOSE. It was a voting strategy they developed

For the Clinton campaign to continue to pitch this slime exposes them for the "change" they bring: a change from dishonest politics as a Republican tactic to dishonest politics as a Democratic tool.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Cathy, Upstate NY — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:00:52 GMT

I think Edwards is really getting desperate now. He will say anything for some free publicity, especially if he thinks it will ingratiate him with Obama and round up a few votes in SC. This is pandering in the extreme! As for Obama, isn't anybody wondering just how TOUGH he really is if he thought Hillary's comments on Meet The Press were an hour long personal attack against him? He HAS NO IDEA what a personal attack from the republicans would feel like!!! All Hillary did was point out his RECORD, so I ask you: How is this a negative personal attack and old school Washington politics?? I think Obama is being rather over sensitive don't you? Everyone knows the Clinton's are not racist, but the Obama camp is doing there damndest to make it about race, aren't they? Obama playing the victim of racism while trying to portray how tough and strong he is won't work, but I guess Edwards didn't get the memo, did he...Hillary for president!!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

KRoss, New Jersey — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:01:51 GMT

Why are people referencing Obama as creating this conversation about race? Obama is not the only African American capable of being offended by the Clinton's statements. You can't blame the Obama campaign for how his supporters feel on the issue. There has been no one in the campaign that has even alluded to the remarks made by the Clintons. Hillary wants people to think that it is the Obama campaign stirring the pot. Read betweent he lines people!!! Hillary is a lot more "experienced" in dirty politics!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Steve A Jonesboro IN — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:04:45 GMT

Way to go dems, start an ignorant squabble over something that has nothing to do with the deadly serious issues we face NOW-in 2008! Keep up this kind of ignorant retoric and we will be handing the repubs the WH in 2009. This is 2008, not 1964-get with the program!!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Now I See — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:05:28 GMT

How very sad... Mrs. Clinton continues to use Karl Rove's brand of campaign tactics to scare and manipulate voters emotionally to choose her in November... uh... no thanks. In the spirit of this discussion, that is Dr. King's powerful and inspiring words ring loud and clear in the face of the Clintons racial division play book... "I've been to the mountain top..." We all know the real motivation at hand here, and we should stand UNITED in rejecting any attempts to divide us, for we're sure to fall.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Now I See — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:23:25 GMT

Response to jef:

Bob Johnson is hardly the bastion of black consciousness, and so him weighing in is of NO CONSEQUENCE to the greater African American community. No... au contraire... it makes me wonder what deal Mr. Johnson has made with Mrs. Clinton, because that's how Mr. Johnson rolls... always "trading up."

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Marbw — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:31:08 GMT

Where Obama's Journey Began

CHICAGO, April 27, 2007
--------------
(CBS) When Barack Obama arrived on Chicago's South Side, he was on a mission to help. The fires of the once-vibrant steel industry had already died, there were 326,000 people unemployed, and nearly 70 percent of public school children were living below the poverty line.

"It was a lot of poverty there, but a lot of pride," says Loretta Augustine, a community activist.

Chicago was in the midst of a political firestorm. Harold Washington, the city's first black mayor, had taken the reins and racial tensions were running high, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric reports.

It was at a church, in 1984, where Obama came to work as a community organizer for a faith-based group called the Developing Communities Project. He worked in Altgeld Gardens, a racially segregated housing project on Chicago's far South Side. In a city where political power means everything, the people of Altgeld were invisible.

"To a great extent, we were powerless," Augustine says.

Obama's challenge was to empower the impoverished residents of Altgeld Gardens and turn them into political players. But older members of the group were skeptical of the 23-year-old Columbia University graduate.

"How was this kid gonna be any help to them?" says Gerry Kellman, who hired Obama.

But over time, Obama earned their trust and figured out how to make those voices heard.

"What Barack had to do was instill confidence in those folks," Kellman says.

Then there was a crucial meeting: A representative from the mayor's office tried to take over — and suddenly the South Side activist rose up.

"From the back of the room came Barack's voice, and he says, 'We want to hear from Loretta. Let Loretta talk,'" Augustine recalls. "And in that instant, he changed the meeting and focused right back on our agenda."

Today, still surrounded by 53 toxic waste dumps, Altgeld Gardens is often called "the toxic donut." In 1967, Augustine's 6-year-old daughter died of leukemia — which she's convinced was caused by toxic waste. Yet no one was listening to the people in the neighborhood.

"We found out there was a secret meeting in South Chicago on this issue and we had been excluded," she says.

Obama and 300 community members marched to that secret meeting.

"You cannot leave the community out of the process. It was so powerful," Augustine says.

Most people stayed in that job for four months. Obama continued to fight for four years, cutting his teeth on community activism. — the first measure of his leadership skills that are now being tested on a much larger stage.

"Barack came here very idealistic, and he left much more practical," Kellman says.

"He left, but he didn't leave us," adds Augustine. "We claim him."

video
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/27/eveningnews/main2737505.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22bcGFeq71U

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Terry Columbi,Mo — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:39:33 GMT

Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton NO way. But on second thought we could save a few dollars on the secret servive detail. Hells bells, what was I thinking? Bill would run up the jet fuel tab flying to every spot on earth. Not to mention the wear tear on the airforce plane.
Go Obamba

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

adner jolly, Atlanta, GA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:41:56 GMT

Hillary likes division, crying on Tv to divided the nation, Experience yes she has a lot, a lot nasty experience, she knows how, ask her how JFK Jr died, I am sure she knows, Eliminated JFK Jr who intented to run for Senator because she wants to get where she is right now. Now she tries so hard to divided blacks and whites to win other states. That's the way she plans to run the country? She talked about 35 years of experience in white House, why our children can't still have Medicaid, why our companies go out of county. why she signed the Bill for Iraq War, when we do not have money to buy Health Insurance for our children, where she was, letting Mortgage industry killing millons of Americans with High Interest Rate Mortgage. Why she supported Aristide a Drug dealer, sending 25 000 Marines to beat up Poor Black haitians because she needed Haiti as Tremplin to open Telephone Company. Is not the first time that Hillary used Black people to gain benefits of it. She needs a good lesson, this time is a pay backtime, she will get it. Ask Hillary why Bill went to haiti? because they like haiti, ask Bill and hillary where is the $ 20 million dollars from China? and for what? haitians people taught that was money for infrastructures but it was a transit money, money laundry, ask them where the money is at now,sure they know. bill and Hillary know. USA have to get answer from them. Please protect me from Bill and Hillary.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

jorel — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:42:04 GMT

Hi Garrett i do agree with you; Obama has to play a very nice game in that situation because the racial carte not going to help any body. unfortunately it could hurt Obama at the end.By the way this election is about big buck, that means until Billary & Obama have money to fight Why not after all the dream country is in recession?

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Shtuey — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:45:37 GMT

Edwards' strategy here is as obtuse as usual. He's attempting to ride the Obama "wave" of "change". I actually watched Meet the Press this morning. Senator Clinton made it quite clear that the Civil Rights Act absolutely would not have happened without Dr. King's efforts to raise the consciousness of Americans toward the realities of life for black Americans, and that equal rights for them had to be guaranteed. But it is also important to remember, and Dr. King knew this, if the President was not willing to embrace this fundamental human truth the Civil Rights Act would most likely have continued to be a dream through the remainder of 60's. She didn't belittle King's efforts at all. Her point was that it required the activism of King, in conjunction with political process that was pushed by Johnson, who then signed the CRA into law. Johnson didn't simply sign the CRA. He had to use his influence, and leverage in Congress to get the Act through. Remember that in 1964 this was not exactly a popular notion and a lot of arm twisting needed to be done. But after his long term service in Congress, most notably as Speaker of the House, Johnson knew about the skeletons in a lot of people's closets and how to push the right buttons.

Her points were this; it's going to take more than flowery speeches to make change happen. King did a lot more than make inspiring speeches. He lived with the threat of death every single day, as Senator Clinton stated. Mr. Obama speaks grandly, but has never put himself into the fire. Change is going to require someone with the force of will, the relationships, and skills to cobble alliances together, and move things forward in Washington (seeing herself as the one of the 3 Democrats remaining who has the ability to do that).

Sadly the one candidate who truly does have those skills, and the will to use them, is now back in New Mexico governing the state of New Mexico when he should be the next President of the United States.

Since it has been reported that Senator Obama has compared himself to Dr. King, as others with little or no knowledge of American history seem to be doing (which I personally find offensive), it is more than fair for the contrast between Obama and King to be made.

For the Obama campaign to categorize her comments as belittling to Dr. King can only be seen as a race card play in an attempt to wrench black voters in South Carolina away from Clinton (speaking of an obtuse strategy), who has a long history of defending, and advocating for their rights and legal protections, as does her husband. In the end this reflects poorly on Obama. It seems to me that he's willing to play the race card in an effort to take attention away from the fact that he is alarmingly inexperienced and doesn't actually have any real plans. This only ends up playing into Clinton's hands.

For the Edwards campaign to do it is nothing less than pandering, and trying to get catch some rays from the "Golden god of Change."

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

F. Johnson- Boston — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:47:47 GMT

John Edwards is very relevant as long as he continues getting only 15% of vote in any primary. Not only does he then get 15% of delegates in that state, but he most likley prevents either Clinton or Obama from getting 50%. Translation- he will be "King Maker" or the real "super delegate" at the convention. Therefore the V.P. nominee of whoever he cuts deal with.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Marbw — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:48:26 GMT

Pool report on Obama’s visit to Pentecostal Temple Church of God in Christ in Las Vegas early this afternoon from Michael Martinez of Chicago Tribune:

In a brief Q & A before Obama entered the church:

Question: Respond to Clinton’s charge that he is distorting her statement on Lyndon Johnson and Martin Luther King:

“I am baffled by that statement by the senator. She made an ill advised statement about Dr. King suggesting that Lyndon Johnson had more to do with the Civil Right Acts. I did not make the statement. I haven’t commented on the statement. For them to suggest that we’re injecting race as a consequence of a statement she made that we haven’t commented on is pretty hard to figure out. Maybe you can tell me and explain to me how we distorted her statement.”

Question: Clinton campaign saying in a conference call earlier today that there is no difference in their record on war in Iraq because both voted for war funding:

“Sen. Clinton started off trying to make history and now she’s trying to rewrite it. She’s trying to rewrite it about my record and hers.”

“In 2002, I made a clear and unequivocal statement before 3,000 people that this war was a bad idea.” He said he was against the war in 2003 and 2004 also.

“Now she chose to vote for the war and she can decide whether it’s a mistake or not. Apparently she has not said anything about it. For her to suggest somehow that half of a sentence that I uttered in 2004 in a setting in which I was trying not to throw the Democratic nominee and vice presidential nominee under the bus, after Tim Russert specifically asked me since you were so opposed to the war, what do you think about the fact that they weren’t, to take that out of context and try to suggest my position and hers is the same is ludicrous. There is not objective observer of this who thinks at all that this argument is credible. And what’s stunning is not only are they trying to distort my record, this is coming from Bill Clinton who is trying to suggest that he opposed the war from the start, something that everybody again who has looked at this objectively is puzzled by.”

Q: then why did he vote for war funding

A: “Once we had our troops two years into a war, it was important that we try to do the best possible job on it. So is Sen. Clinton’s argument is that the only people who were principled about this were people who voted against funding all the time, if that’s the case, she should talk to Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer (war critics who also voted for the funding). Apparently they weren’t against the war the entire time.”

Q: Dick Durbin equating the Clinton attacks to swiftboating you. Is Clinton swiftboating you?

“I think they have decided to run a relentlessly negative campaign and I don’t think anybody who’s watching would deny that. I gather that she’s determined that instead of tyring to sell herself on why she would be the best president, she’s trying to convince folks that I wouldn’t be a good one.” “I don’t think that’s what the American people are looking for.”

Obama was greeted by about 420 congregants and a 50-member choir at the Pentecostal Temple, a Church of God in Christ church, an African-American church in a Las Vegas neighborhood populated by black and Latino families, who largely live in poverty, according to residents. There were 20 empty seats in the sanctuary, unlike Obama’s last visit to Las Vegas on Friday night, where more than 1,000 people were turned away from the jammed pack gymnasium of Del Sol High School.

http://thepage.time.com/full-comments-from-obamas-vegas-media-availability/

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

F. Johnson- Boston — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:50:19 GMT

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Republican4Life, USA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:50:24 GMT

Yes Edwards, you're right - change can't come from Washington and never will. Now you're starting to sound like a good Republican. Next step, abandon all your socialistic platforms and I'll gladly vote for you.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Lone Ranger — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:52:38 GMT

John Edwards the best at talking about these issues!

God Bless you John Edwards!!

Keep fighting the good fight and raising American to a higher standard!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Joseph Murray, Orlando, FL — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:53:56 GMT

What Hillary meant was that King's dream became a reality after President Johnson realized the importance of equality as urged by King - Hillary meant that it took King to make this happen and the President signed it into law. Hillary and Bill would not try to tarnish King's image afterall they have been and continue to be lifelong friends of the African American community - Bill was called the first Black President - remember?

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

MAMN,PALM BEACH,FL — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:56:23 GMT

Sen. Clinton said "while I was talking to the voters, I found my own voice" That is true, now she knows how easy to manipulate the innocent people’s mind and make them believe her acting. She thinks that by playing innocent victims role and showing the emotions and gender card that female can rule over the male, she is thinking that she will draw more female votes, but American female population will not be fooled by that. Also she obviously found her ill voice which bringing the most negative campaign strategy in democratic primary voting history. She is no better than dirty politicians who ignites the unfortunate controversial incidents and blame the other party. She did authorize the war and now saying she did not know if it would have given Bush the permission for War. This undermines her so called 35 years experience. She opposed the funding to the troops at war and blaming Obama to vote for it. She must forget that once the troops are in the middle of any war, it is our fundamental duty, either you for the war or not must need to help the troops with proper funds so they can win the battle. Shame to her for playing this Washington dirty politics which is dividing the democratic caucus. She should abandoned her craziness about winning the nomination by hook or by crook.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Texas — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:04:01 GMT

Newsflash-the Civil Rights movement was the LAST TIME in American history that the American people insisted on change, created change when Washington not only did not have welcome arms, was against it. All this talk about who deserves credit is a waste of time and energy. Why not create change now, in 2008? This so called Obama movement for change--change from what to what? At least with Edwards we know what his message of change is about--taking power away from the corporations and special interests and giving it to the people. Hillary--it's all about her and if she is the Dem in Nov--say hello to your next Republican president.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Lisa, Minnesota — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:14:53 GMT

Edwards is a good guy to stand up for what is right. He is making amends for his vote for the Iraq war. I forgive him, but I like the fact that Barack Obama was on the right side of the war in the beginning. Tim Russert pointed that out today on Meet The Press. What a good day in politics for Obama!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Mark Watkins — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:21:01 GMT

This is the brilliant (though deplorable) Clinton strategy:
First, you put out stuff though surrogates that is a little insensitive, but nothing that is not plausibly deniable nor easily fixed with an apology. Examples: shaheen drug dealer, penn cocaine, kerrey madrassa, cuomo shuck and jive, anoymous to guardian "hip black friend, etc" These are poison pills to be introduced into the media echo chamber. This Bob johnson comment is just the latest exxample.
After the poison pill is out there for about a news cycle or so, extend it by making a news cycle about the apology or backtracking or justification.

Make sure you come up with something new every week or two to keep the conversation alive.
The plan is never to be overtly racist, never to have a Keith Richards/Kramer moment, of course. The way to play the race card without looking like playing the race card is to knock off Obama by a "death by a thousand (racial) cuts" as opposed to any full-frontal racial attacks.
Now, the Obama people know that any polarizing discussion of race hurts them, so for the most part they just shut up abaout it, be magnanimous, and try to rise above. And for most the campaign through shaheen and kerrey they turn the other cheek and appeal to our better instincts as Hillary appeals to our bad instincts.
Obama has done that. He has remarkably made this campaign as little about race as possible. So much so that people had forgetten about the fact that he is Black. But when the clintons started falling behind, they had to find ways to remind folks "He's one of those people."
Now while Obama is going to try hard to stay above the fray, it is impossible to expect that every media outlet and black person in the country is not going to eventually get upset with the "death by a thousand cuts" race baiting.
So here is the next brilliant manuver on the part of the Clintons campaign. Once these non-Obama campaign people start complaining a little, hang their grievances around Obama's neck and say or imply that Obama is playing racial politics himself. Central to this is to make a straw man argument with the complicit help of media hacks. Basically ignore the really bad stuff (drug dealer, secular madrassa, hip black friend, etc) and focus on the least offensive (fairy tale) and then knock down the straw man that the Clintons are racists themselves while ignoring the pattern or subtle, death by a thousand cuts, code worded, rovian appeals to racism in the electorate. The media is structuring this story to play into the "blacks getting upset over nothing" mentality. Meida types are going to erect the straw man, knock it down and then accuse Obaam of race baiting when he is the vicitm of it and say that he is doing this to win in SC. This is brilliant "blame the victim" jujuitsu, folks and you saw HIllary doing this very thing today in the NYtimes, in the AP stroy, and on Meet the Press
And here is the Associated Press version of tHIllary's jujitsu: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Clinton-Obama.html
Noticed that they even got the Assocated press to write a story being sent to low-infomtion, casual voters in local papers thoughout the country putting Al Sharpton and Barack Obama in the same sentence.
Mission accomplished, they must be saying over at Clinton headquarters. After injecting race into the discussion, the Clinton people have just conned the NY Times and Associated Press and used Meet the Press to spread the lie that the LBJ/MLK concerns originated not in the broader black community but rather was some distortion coming from the Obama campaign, something that is demonstrably false.
They're cheering over at Clinton headquarters because the media is dutifully playing into the "Black folks yet again getting riled up over nothing and making whites feel guilty" narrative and muddying the waters by hanging this around the Obama campaigns' neck.
Hillary says "I think" this all came from the Obama campaign.
Please, she knows well that people like Clyborn and Brazille came to opinions on their own on this and that Burton, Axelod, Ploufe, etc did not manufacture their opinions
The goal of the Clinton campaign is simple and brilliant: make the Obama campaign personally responsible for every thing ever said by any Black person in America (while claiming that they are not responsible for the words of their national co-chair/shaheen, pollster/chief strategist/penn, key endorsers Kerrey and Cuomo, or the candidate's husband himself.
This is yet another way the Clintons are brillantly turning Obama, somebody who has gone out of his way to be a post-racial conciliator , as "the aggrieved black candidate." By morphing him into Jesse Jackson in the eyes of voters, just as republicans morphed Max Cleland into the images of Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in the 2002 midterms, the Clintons are simultaeously playing "death by a thousand cuts" racial politics while tarring Obama as the racially divisive figure.
If this were a crime drama, the story line would be the innocent being framed by the real perpetrators. Oops, I just gave the Clintons their next line of attack, to compare Obama with OJ.
God, the Clintons are really good at manipulating the media. I wonder if Karl Rove is giving them the advice he hinted to in the wall street journal this week? 8 years of HIllary may be the best route to a 2016 Jeb Bush restoration and Karl Rove likely has a vested interest in the propogation of bi-dynastic wedge politics.
And then in the so called "Damage control" Bill Clinton goes on Al Sharpton's radio show. Why did bill Clinton go on Al Sharpton's radio show? It was a tactically brillinat manuver to get Barack Obama and Al Sharption in the same news story and thus subtly linked in the minds of your average, relatively unsophisticated voter who does not take the time to hear Obama's full inclusive speeches, but has just now read an AP article in their local paper mentioning both Sharpton and Obama and she or she is thinking to himself, "When I get behind that curtain, there is no way that I am voting for THAT guy."
Now the Clintons are not dumb, they knew there would be blowback from the black community, but they know that blowback will help them get solidarity with voters they needs and Obama had been making inroads with in Iowa: lower class white democrats. Furthermore, as this contest moves towards Nevada and Feb 5th, the Clintons know that by ginning up a little racial crucible, they are going to help turn out hispanic voters. Look at what one of Clinton's own pollsters said in buried in the last two paragraphs of Ryan Lizza's latest article:
"On the morning after Clinton's victory, I talked to Sergio Bendixen, one of her pollsters, who specializes in the Hispanic vote. In all honesty, the Hispanic vote is extremely important to the Clinton campaign, and the polls have shown and today is not a great day to cite polls that even though she was slipping with women in Iowa and blacks in South Carolina, she was not slipping with Hispanics, he said. The fire wall doesn't apply now, because she is in good shape, but before last night the Hispanic vote was going to be the most important part of her fire wall on February 5th. The implications of that strategy are not necessarily uplifting.
When I asked Bendixen about the source of Clinton's strength in the Hispanic community, he mentioned her support for health care, and Hispanic voters affinity for the Clinton era. It's one group where going back to the past really works, he said. All you need to say in focus groups is Let?s go back to the nineties. But he was also frank about the fact that the Clintons, long beloved in the black community, are now dependent on a less edifying political dynamic: The Hispanic voter and I want to say this very carefully has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."
So the clinton campaign has admitted on the record that part of their electoral strength going forward is hispanic racism against blacks. The clinton people know the demographic changes in this country are favoring Hispanics and so its ok if Blacks are thrown uder the bus at this stage of their political career.
Just as Bill Clinton was proclaimed the "First Black Preisdent" Hillary "chips and guacamole" Clinton is now going to try to be crowned the "First Hispanic president." Look there is a pattern of reasonably high level surrogaes doing this dirty work, and not just against Obama. Earlier in the year, both Rangel and Vilsack came out to trash Guilliani on his marriages and infidelity right around the time the christian evalngelicans were gathering for some meeting. Of course, the clinton campaign denies that they had anything to do with that either.
How many times does this have to happen for people to realize that this is a pattern, not an isolated accident?
Now that people are starting to get wise to her tactics, she is going to play her "A" game: have black supporters like Ben Johnson put out the poison pills to enhance the plausibly deniable aspect by having the person saying them be black and not white.
If people really believe that these are all "Accidents" or simple "misunderstandings" then you have to accept the proposition that the clinton campaign is not in any control of its high level surrogates. Do we really think this lack of discipline will serve her well in the general or in the white house?
So take your choice, either Hillary is a nixonian race baiter or she is not in control of her own campaign.
Which makes people think she would be the best leader of the free world?
RKA, IL

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Howard, Sidney Center, NY — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:22:05 GMT

pressed for a comment, edwards did the right thing here...answer the question to the point while remaining on the sideline......obama and clinton are both pathetic but obama moreso for completely taking hillary out of context...and don't try to say that he hasn't read the whole quote before you comment and not just the part that fits your comment- bill o'reilly makes his living doing that shabby journalism stuff!!!.....maybe now folks will start to side more with edwards while these two babies fight it out with each other!!!! we're still not getting any real talk about the issues from them its all just hot air at this point; edwards is still the only one addressing the real issues!!!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

ge~pa — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:23:20 GMT

The fact of the matter is Kings dream was realized when LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Sure King was one of many who fought in the trenches for civil rights, but it was President Lyndon Johnson who passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If the president and his administration was against civil rights for the blacks, he would not have signed it. Thats not pretty, but he was the President. LOOK AT WHAT BUSH GETS AWAY WITH.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Gary Hamburg, Los Angeles, CA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:26:28 GMT

John Edwards is right to be troubled by Hillary Clinton's remarks: she is very clearly playing the race card against Obama by suggesting that, in the end, white politicians like LBJ (and her) are the real 'change agents,' while African-Americans like Martin Luther King, Jr. (and Obama) can 'raise hopes' but not really accomplish their objectives. Her remarks are disgusting because they're so carefully calculated. She, and the country, ought to be above this kind of politics, but she isn't. Very sad.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Terry Missouri — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:30:36 GMT

When I was in the army, I attended the Mormons services, after the services they had a talk back session. I’m black, but they encouraged to speak up. My children attended the Mormons middle school, and went to the Mormons college. Every week 22 Mormon guys stop to read scripture. I like the Mormons, unfortunately I'm voting the Dem ticket.

Go Omaba

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Jade7243 — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:33:52 GMT

Actually, Hillary is WRONG. She stated unequivocally that Barack Obama COMPARED HIMSELF to MLK and JFK and LBJ. Here is the actual chronology:

Debate: Hillary slams Obama for talking about Hope, says we need a "reality check." Says that "words don't matter." Says that Barack is giving people "false hope."

Barack says "no, words do matter Hillary." Talks about us being a nation built on hope.

Next day: Barack speech, he says: "what if JFK said the moon is too far away, can't do it. What if MLK says I had a dream but it's too hard, we can't do it." Continues to make case that this nation is built on hope. AT NO TIME does he compare himself to either leader.

Later that same day or the next: Hillary makes the FALSE STATEMENT that Barack compared himself to MLK, JFK, and LBJ -- BUT ONLY AFTER a campaign worker/supporter/surrogate uses the line in her intro of Clinton with Clinton standing on stage smiling.

Then Clinton goes on FOX to expand and revise her remarks even more so to diminish King, and smear Obama.

She makes one more campaign stop and lets all sorts of false stuff fly, expanding on what she said on FOX to the ooohs and oh nooooos of the audience.

Bill is meanwhile slamming Obama at an event of his own (This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen.)

Clinton faux-cries. "Iron My Shirt!"

Coupled with the other scurrilous remarks of the week by Clinton surrogates prior to the primary, Black folks are starting to get enraged. Donna Brazile on CNN is among the first to express her concern and displeasure.

--- There you have it in a nutshell. Clinton started it. Obama will finish it.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Washington, DC — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:36:20 GMT

It is apparent that the media misquoting or misleading what the candidates are saying...when will the news reporter and when will the American people stop buying into cheap stories or giving in to cheap slanderous stories just to sell papers or just to get their network rating up over another racial issue again using BLACK FOLKS ...
NOW everyone saw the clip and it real plain and SIMPLE that the Clinton’s did NOT belittle MLK at all we do need people in the inside to make things happen it call networking....MLK could not pass it into law...The Clinton’s for years help our community and now we have a BLACK or BLACK MUSLIM is going to bring division into the political race when in fact when the Clinton was the president we would say we have a black white president now the dynamics has change when there is a black male in the running….DAYUM!!!!! WHY can't Obama come on and defend his record regarding the war vote that he his being questioned on and then (Obama) voted to fund the war...we can go on and on regards the records of the candidates. We need to stop letting the media drags the "BLACK FOLKS" into something that is not true again...when we will say enough is enough or are we running off of hope and not reality....Obama never has given any real suggesting or ideal on how is going to do the things that he says “give us hope” like Janet says “what has he done for us lately” and is Obama playing the race card just because he’s BLACK or BLACK MUSLIM what has he done for black America….I did not hear anything from this brother until now and I still don’t see or understand the change he talking about….WHERE IS HIS AGENDA FOR US? I think Hillary put into action her Health Care plan, Economy plan, and her stance to get bring the troop home…All I hear from Obama is a promise once I become president what are going to do before u get there? Let focus on the main issue of why these candidates are running for PRESIDENCY….and earns our votes our fore father’s fought for and not to give it away just because you’re black….

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Howard, Sidney Center, NY — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:41:38 GMT

Some people are trying to make it look like edwards is crawling down the middle of the street behind these two other candidates with a dustpan and brush trying to scrape together any little tidbit of publicity for his campaign- give me a break- look at the delegate numbers people 24-18 that doesn't look too bad for a guy who's being outspent 5-1 and thats probably a low figure!!!....hang in there John we need you you to do that for us, hang in there the grass roots campaign train is starting to pick up speed!!!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Michael — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:43:13 GMT

FULL QUOTE:

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

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

MM — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:51:10 GMT

Thank you, Senator Edwards. No one should let Hillary and her cronies get away with this sort of thing. Amazing that she is caught on camera making comments about MKL and now they are trying to blame Obama and his campaign??? Amazing

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Georgia — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:21:16 GMT

The Obama campaign has absolutely contributed to the racial arguments. The same night that Hillary won in NH, Obama's national campaign co-chair Jessie Jackson Jr. made statements questioning Hillary getting emotional about "her appearance" but not for the victims of Hurricane Katrina. He further went on to say that this issue was important with the campaigns moving to SC, which has a large African-American population. First of all, for him to try to make a racial issue out of an emotional moment Hillary had with women voters when asked how she was coping with the pressures of the campaign was so inappropriate. Second of all, Hillary got emotional when talking about her interest in public service, not her appearance. Race had NOTHING to do with that moment, and yet he tried to make it an issue by tying it to Katrina victims coincidentally right before the campaigns headed to SC!! Hmmm....seems to me the Obama campaign was working quite hard to set this racist storyline up. What is bothersome is that once again, hardly anyone is covering that story, but the Clinton comments are running continuously across all the major networks and websites.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

anonymous — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:22:28 GMT

Edwards continues to be Obama's angry poodle. I guess he will do anything to get some media attention these days....

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Joe, Houston — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:22:40 GMT

"Those who believe that real change starts with Washington politicians have been in Washington too long and are living in a fairy tale. Real change has never started in Washington. Real change came from those who have fought in the trenches."

Good message John! "Time to knock down that wall" Washington. Good luck getting your message out and don't let the powers that be write you off. America still has opportunity to choose your logic for change over the others rhetoric.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Melissa — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:27:11 GMT

Edwards is losing and he should start attacking Obama
as much has he does Clinton.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

JIM STEWART — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:27:36 GMT

AT SOME POINT, THE CONTINUED RACIAL OVERTONES WILL PROBABLY TURN MANY VOTERS AWAY AND THE INTEREST IN "CHANGE" COULD DIS-APPEAR!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Stephen — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:28:46 GMT

So Hillary says she is trying to break the greatest glass ceiling. And what does she think Obama is trying to do? She's been ballroom dancing on the top side of that ceiling. The comments about MLK and LBJ only reinforce the status quo, that is, that it's not an African Americans place to be ultimate decision maker or initiator even though African Americans have been striving for equality (not superiority). MLK essentially passed notes through a hole in that ceiling to LBJ. King's dream was great, but it damn well wasn't running for President. He was assassinated for leadership in the arena he did have. We are seeing how deeply entrenched racism is in this country, even in the Clintons, who many African Amercians respected. The reversal in allegience and sense of entitlement is an old story. She can't really effect the type of change that can hapen when we are all percieved and treated equally because she is inadvertently extinguishing it out of personal ambition. The change we need has to start in the hearts of people who are uplifted, not depressed by the continuence of rancid politics and leadership.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Joe, Houston — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:30:23 GMT

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Lura, Philadelphia, PA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:35:10 GMT

Of the three candidates, the one who is closest to Martin Luther King, in terms of standing up and fighting the entrenched special interests, is John Edwards. The fight isn't about race now; it's about the increasing divide between the two Americas. The middle class is disappearing and we will be left with the poor (a servant class) and the wealthy (the owners' class, corporate greed).

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Dutchboy52 — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:40:43 GMT

Hillary said those things about Obama and MLK because she doesn't believe she can win the black vote in S.C.. So by dissing blacks, she kisses up to Latino's in an attempt to replace the black vote, she's very divisive. I just hope Latino's remember when they call her on whether illegal alien Latino's should have driver licenses she talked out of both sides of her mouth and wouldn't answer, in the next debate she said no to licenses. Beware Latino's, take a lesson from Blacks, she will say and do anything to get your vote, to win this election. So she's giving Edwards more of an opportunity at getting at the black vote too and obviously he's taking full advantage of it in this article. Ironically, Obama is the only candidate not talking about it or making it an issue, he appears to be taking the higher road, i.e. lead us to unite not divide, tell the truth not lies, to change our ways if we really want to change our future. Obama is like a very good teacher, I hope we're learning our lessons.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

MM — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:12:21 GMT

Please Nevada, SC - send this corrupt lying woman far, far away with your votes.

HRC supporters: except for yourselves, what you are hearing is a resounding chorus of "No to Hillary" from everyone else.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Joe in L.A., CA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:43:44 GMT

HILLARY'S MLK/LBJ COMMENTS IN PERSPECTIVE FOR ALL HRC SUPPORTERS WHO DON'T/CAN'T OR WON'T SEE THE CALCULATION THAT BLACK PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE OR WHO KNOW THEIR AMERICAN HISTORY AND ARE PROUD OF IT SEE:

Please allow me this analogy casting a well-respected Democrat, Joe Biden, in Hillary's role and women and Hillary in the roles of African-Americans and Obama respectively.

Joe Biden responds to Hillary's call for women to renew the activism displayed when Suffragists won their hard fought right to vote with this statement to reporters:

Senator Biden:
"We all have a lot of respect for Susan B. Anthony and the Suffrage Movement; but let's be real and face facts: that movement didn't really take hold until President Wilson changed his position on it in 1918. I mean, the Constitutional Amendment to give women the right to vote was first introduced in 1878, but it didn't become law until 1920 over 40 years later after Wilson decided to push it through. Now, the suffragettes and their passionate speeches and rallies were important to be sure, but it took a President to actually make real change happen."

Would this raise any female eyebrows? Especially if you knew Biden to be a long-time ERA and womens' rights supporter as well as a student of the Suffrage Movement, would that not make you seriously question his motives even more if you knew for certain that he was aware of the real history?

Honestly, wouldn't most women interpret the above statement as demeaning the value of what Ms. Anthony and the Suffragettes did just to self-servingly prove some point that women voters TODAY still need someone like him, Biden, to effect any real change in their lives? And would the average, educated woman need Hillary Clinton or her campaign to tell them that, or would female leaders like Congressman Clyburn of SC did, independently rise up to caution the Biden campaign about its use of language...and probably less neutrally and politely than Mr. Clyburn actually did to the Clintons? Don't you know the answer?

Please re-read this hypothetical Biden statement beacause I was careful to add the Clinton-type qualifiers that appear like respect or deference. But isn't it clear that women would be right to see this not only as a denigration of the relative importance of women in their own empowerment movement, but also as a calculated attempt by Biden to diminish his current female opponent's ability by revising the actual history of the movement. And we are in denial because we honestly believed that only Bush, Cheney and this Administration sought to re-write history for their own narrow political gain.

In fact, if this hypothetical had actually happened, I think you'd agree that we would probably witness womens' rallies about it and public pressure applied for all women to now endorse Ms. Clinton and on any women who had formerly endorsed Biden to now renounce him. This would be "IRON MY SHIRT" on super-steroids.

But we are not seeing that today from the Obama Campaign or from other Black People, although it came close. The House Majority Whip, Mr. Clyburn of South Carolina saw those words come out of Ms. Clinton's mouth on TV and issued his warning with the caveat that it made him lean toward endorsing Obama. He had a conversation with the campaigns and decided to stay neutral, undoubtedly because he wanted to be true to his commitment to put the his district's economic interests ahead of his own political instincts of the interests of any specific campaign. But lest I remind you that Mr. Clyburn is not only the highest ranking Black Congressman in the Democratic Party, but he is also a living survivor of the American Civil Rights Movement. And as such, just like the Suffragettes would in the hypothetical here, he would not and did not need to have someone else interpret for him what that statement said, what it implied, and the purpose behind it. So do you think he will forget? He basically just called a foul against Hillary, I'm sure she promised not to do it again, but no one should hold their breath.

I do not intend to demean Ms. Clinton's 35 years of experience; however, I point to it to illustrate that no one hearing the above Biden version would accept that Biden, who has been in the Senate almost 30 years, had somehow accidentally fumbled his way into these words as Ms. Clinton initially claimed. Oh yes, later that day, before her campaign got ahold of her and she started accusing the "Obama Campaign" of misinterpreting her statement, she actually acknowleded that she mis-spoke and that her statement may have left an impression that she did not intend. In other words, she was taking personal responsibility at that point; because it was clear that Black people instantly responded before any campaign had a chance to as would women in the above scenario.

But alas, just like I believe she sincerely choked up not for America's loss but for her own projected loss in NH, what she also was sincerely and accurately noting in that acknowledgement was that her narcissism blinded her from seeing how the intended slight against Obama, by definition was a denigration of King. Can you see that now?

Talking heads in support of her like Bob Johnson say she would have never intended to diminish MLK and I am prone to agree. Some HRC defenders alternately point out that Hillary spoke about MLK and not Obama to argue that the statement was note intended to diminish anyone. But in my hypothetical, Biden never mentions Hillary, only Susan B. Anthony. Yet women know the statement in response to the mobilization of women on behalf a female candidate is designed to question Hillary's ability or the ability of any women to achieve real change without a man or without a President like Biden. So we agree that Biden knows Hillary is his target and women hearing it know Hillary is his target even though she is not mentioned. However, women also see instantly that he has just marginalized Susan B. Anthony into being a bystander in a Rose Garden ceremony for Woodrow Wilson, and all to make the back-handed slap at his female opponent. If Biden is surprised and genuinely in shock that women publicly claim he has denigrated the legacy of Susan B. Anthony with that seemingly harmless statement of fact that the Amendment was introduced into Congress in 1878 but did not become law until 1920 after Wilson changed his mind in 1918 and started pushing it (which is absolutely the history BTW); then Biden would only have his own narcissism and myopic-attack-mode vision to blame for not seeing the obvious.

I hope this helps people see the hypocrisy and race-baiting of the Clintons. They know the power and impact of race including the fact that most people don't want to see Blacks make an issue of it; so that is what they are accusing Obama of when in fact, they have done it and done it fairly successfully, I must admit. It appears their new strategy is to escalate until race-fatigued voters dispatch the Black guy or the half-Black guy as the fastest way to eliminate this racial tension.

Final note to Obama supporters: take it down a few notches to match your candidate's disposition, pray for him to stay on the high road and not take the bait to get in the mud with them so he can present voters in each state a real choice, let it play out and trust the American people. They usually get it right in the long run. Personally, I will just kiss-it-up-to-God, so to speak and believe that His Will will prevail whether that be President Clinton, Obama, or McCain for America. I'll do what I can, but I'm at peace and believing on HIM for the victory. Just like we did for Bill Clinton back in '98 when we put the breastplate of righteousness on him to help the First Family survive Impeachmment or Resignation and certain financial ruin, let's all vouch for Obama with everyone we know, remind fellow Democrats of how we successfully defended the Clintons from far worse though equally politically-driven attacks by power-hungry Republican politicians who thought it was their time and their turn, ask them to vote like it's the people's turn now, and just pray that GOD continues to use Obama AND Hillary in HIS perfect way that allows them to be revealed so HIS WILL can be done.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Gorgei, Cedar Falls, IA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:00:49 GMT

If Hillary wins...we all lose! The election so far should underscore the fact that IND.'s and even some GOP members will vote for Obama. She wins this thing, DEM's lose that base. I am guessing they represent 1/3 of the country.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Samuel Zeleke, Washington, DC — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:37:42 GMT

I think he is a phony.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

SQ — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:45:02 GMT

I am so sick and tired of the HRC supporters claiming that Edwards is making these comments because he is desperate to get media attention and shilling for Obama.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Edwards is standing up for what he believes and holding politicians accountable for their words (i.e. HRC). The MSM has made this a two-horse race...not the voters. I guess, for the first time in American political history, it is a bad time to be the white male candidate...The MSM, so desperate for ratings, loves the idea of the first black or woman president. Obviously, many posters on this board are caught up in this same hoopla.

Whatever happened to voting for the best candidate regardless of their gender or ethnicity? Don't get me wrong, I love that I live in a country where a black man and a woman are undeniable leaders and credible candidates for President. That said, gender and ethnicity shouldn't be criteria by which we base our support...Unfortunately, it appears that many people are voting for Obama and Hillary for exactly those reasons. We've all seen on thse boards: Hillary supporters are relentless with their attacks on people being anti-woman if they don't support her. I could go on and on with the examples.

JRE's voice is very relevant and his presence in this election is needed - if for nothing else than to keep these two in check and in the process, demonstrate to the MSM that it does not have the power to coorinate the candidate of its choice.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Gorgei, Cedar Falls, IA — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:47:20 GMT

Want to see the truth about this whole thing? Please listen to Maher's articulation to Tony Snow about how the GOP fears Obama and needs Clinton to motivate thei base;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_G7X7ugKsVM

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

WDRussell, East Liverpool, Ohio — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:54:52 GMT

Just listened to Dr. King's VietNam speech yesterday.
What an exhilarating speech.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

James Brown , Eugene , Oregon — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:56:10 GMT

The more i see of the Clinton's , the clearer it become's , just how dishonest and underhanded they really are.

Obama has won my vote , and the Clinton's are the ones that made that decision easy for me.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Indygirl, Piketon, Ohio — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:59:49 GMT

Go Edwards!!! I can't wait to cast my vote for you!

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Shreik — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:08:49 GMT

Please Nevada, SC - send this corrupt lying woman far, far away with your votes.

We don't want her either. We got enough fruit cakes in Far, Far Away Land.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

CB — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:26:29 GMT

Again ..... "aABH"..... anyone, ANYONE but Hillary will help this country move forward with some level of potential bi=partisan working relationships, less devisiveness, and less phoniness in the White House. She and Bill lie, mislead, exaggerate....like 35 years of experience, when others honestly speak of elected years of public service, etc, etc. America would be much better if they justr went away.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

marvel — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:34:44 GMT

Edward not man enough to stand up to Obama, Go Hillary

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

SN, MN — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:25:42 GMT

Too bad we can’t even get through a Democratic primary without a fight over race. How do you think this is going to pan out in the general election? This clearly demonstrates that far from being a uniter, Obama will divide us even more.

The Obama camp and his supporters are the ones injecting race into the election and have been doing so from the beginning. They are trying to reap the positives, (white guilt, the racial loyalty of minorities, hostility to white males and their history of social dominance), while avoiding the negatives (stereotypes of African-Americans, stubborn white opposition to gains in minority power). And, if they can brand their opponents with the scarlet “R”, so much the better.

Leveraging race may be a successful tactic for them in the primaries, but it will be a liability in the general, especially if it causes significant resentment with white Democratic voters.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Edwards is a must — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 01:42:29 GMT

Democrats beware--it's Edwards or bust in November. Texas is BIG REPUBLICAN country--they would miss their own funeral to get to the voting booth to vote against Hillary. Edwards does not have THAT kind of affect on Republicans.

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

Bruce L. Thiessen, Bakersfield, California — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:25:41 GMT

Hillary's remarks concerning MLK may not have been deliberately racist, but they were, at best, an extremely poor choice of words. Or perhaps those words were deliberately selected. Either way, the end result was a diminishing of the role of MLK, the man tributed in this song:

It Only Hurts When I Cry
(A Tribute to Martin Luther King Jr.)
Dr BLT
words and music by Dr BLT copyright 2008
http://www.drblt.net/music/ItOnlyDemo2.mp3

Edwards 'troubled' by MLK remarks

edie, good thunder, mn — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:59:35 GMT

Edwards was campaigning for change long before Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton came along. I think all three candidates have strong and varied credentials, however, Ms. Clinton voted for the war in Iraq and never has really apologized for that, Obama did have the good sense and 'wisdom' not to support the war from the get-go and finally, Edwards voted for it but did apologize for that oversight. I don't think any of them got it right as far as who was instrumental for the successful passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964... While Martin Luther King Jr. and all of his followers were pouring out blood, sweat,tears and loss of life (literally) on the streets of America..President LBJ was pitching the same message to Congress and to the American people. That sychronization of power from both camps brought about the much needed and long over-due Civil Rights Act. But....but....it takes a strong movement with a strong message and conviction that gets the attention of those up on the hill...I think MLK brought the stewing kettle together and brought the temperature in the kitchen down so that we could all really 'see'the path to true justice and equality for all...but you actually had to live in those times to really get the understanding of what being black in America was about..for them to stand up in the wake of such aggression,oppression, stupidty, murder, segregation..the list is endless..took guts..the total movement took a lot of major guts. I think that's what Edwards was refering to and that being..it's the people on the ground...in the front lines that are the proponents of change; those are the people who truely sacrificed...they are the ones who created real change...by getting the attention of those in power...those folks on the hill(all white people at that time, btw)...to LISTEN to the people who want 'change' and actually 'ACT' on that premise,should also be given and deserve our recognition as well. This at a time in history where we have a Commander and Chief who could care less about how the American people feel. We should all think about that at election time.