Is there a place for Blacks in the Progressive movement?

[angee_is_mad]

Let me clarify. Is there a place for Blacks in the progressive party, besides delivering 90% of the Black vote election after election and receiving crumbs as a result?

Is the tent big enough for genuine diversity at the table with different ideas and opinions? Or are Blacks like children? Better to be seen and not heard?

This country is moving more to the right and unfortunately this party is too.

There will be a time when the party can not depend on this constituency. Blacks may not go repub, but they just might stay at home come election time. They just might get tired of being pimped.

Disenfranchise is a bitch and folks better recognize. There are not enough soccor moms and nascar dads to make up votes that the party will lose.

[mark414]

1. ohhh boy

you are probably going to get hit hard for this one, or completely ignored...i got your back either way

edit: OR misunderstood

[Bluebear]

5. What if she gets some thoughtful comments?

[Skittles]

41. I absolutely understand the anger in the original post

I think black folk have been tossed a bone by the Democratic Party time after time after time. It annoys me; I cannot imagine how it feels actually BEING black.

[cally]

108. Completely agree

I think the Dems take black folk for granted. We have to build a better party.

[ikojo]

113. Not only black folk but working class people of all

races. Clinton did everything he could to get NAFTA passed. NAFTA totally screwed working class people.

As long as people are ABB or in the case of the next election ABAR (anyone but a repugnican) the Dems will do NOTHING to change the rightward shift because they will assume, as they did this past election, that working class people and black people have nowhere else to go.

Greens, especially in the city of St Louis, are working hard to build coalitions with black people. I think this is a good thing. Just as the Libertarians at the Cato Institute and other groups have caused the pugs to adopt a more radically right wing message, so too will a REAL challenge or threat from the Greens or another progressive third party cause the Dems to move at least more to the center. Heck if the Dems moved to the center they'd probably be Nixonian Republicans.

A strong left that holds Dems accountable is the only thing that will correct the rightward shift.

[Ellen Forradalom]

2. I say yes indeed

but who's listening to me?

[pauliedee]

171. Blacks are the Democratic Party leaders

Blacks are the Democratic Party leaders, BUT we must do better at getting our constituents to vote.....Apathy is a big problem. For the poor, our only weapon is our vote. We need to turn out BIG TIME!!! The huge black populations in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi should be able to make those states at least swing states.

Idiots like Tavis Smiley do the bullshit "Lou Dobbs" line playing the neutral media game. Smiley uses the Bush lines saying look at both parties. Why??? !@#$%^&*(!!! Wake up Tavis!!!!

The Repugs are trying to take us back to slavery!!! Their heavy handed redistricting has squeezed the black vote into fewer districts, shrinking the number of congressional seats available to
black/democratic candidates.

Any black, veteran, Ohioan or elderly person who voted for Bush voted AGAINST themselves!!!! Or they were corrupt and got paid like Armstrong Williams. :spank:

[southlandshari]

192. "Huge" black populations?

According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the African American population in my state, Alabama, is 26% While it is certainly more than the national percentage (12%), it is still far from a majority.

That said, that 26% of Alabama's population continue to give the vast majority of their votes to Democratic candidates. Kerry easily carried the counties in Alabama with the largest black populations last year. I would guess the same is true in other states across the South - black voters remain the most consistent and faithful supporters of our party, yet they still have to endure accusations of apathy and ignorance from within the party. Too many still expect blacks to do a great deal of the heavy lifting in electing Democratic candidates, and then are far too quick to blame them when things don't go well for the party. The popular "they are voting against their own self-interest" is particularly offensive and paternalistic.

I don't mean to attack you, paulidee. Just offer a different perspective on this issue. One thing we'll have to agree to disagree on is Tavis Smiley - an "idiot"? Yikes! I think he is one of the best broadcast commentators on issues of community and politics in this country. Don't always agree with everything he says, but I really respect the man and his ideas.

[pauliedee]

172. Repug redistricting squeezes black vote into fewer districts

Blacks are the Democratic Party leaders, BUT we must do better at getting our constituents to vote.....Apathy is a big problem. For the poor, our only weapon is our vote. We need to turn out BIG TIME!!! The huge black populations in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi should be able to make those states at least swing states.

Idiots like Tavis Smiley do the bullshit "Lou Dobbs" line playing the neutral media game. Smiley uses the Bush lines saying look at both parties. Why??? !@#$%^&*(!!! Wake up Tavis!!!! :puke:

The Repugs are trying to take us back to slavery!!! Their heavy handed redistricting has squeezed the black vote into fewer districts, shrinking the number of congressional seats available to
black/democratic candidates. :grr:

Any black, veteran, Ohioan or elderly person who voted for Bush voted AGAINST themselves!!!! Or they were corrupt and got paid like Armstrong Williams. :spank:

Paul D

[Bluebear]

3. Well as far as I am concerned you are preaching to the choir

Of course I embrace my African-American brothers and sisters. Their cause is my cause although I am not black. A woman's right to choose is my cause, even though it will never affect me. The tent is big and wide but somehow we have to get our collective message out to OUR party's leadership. I stand with you.

[ConsAreLiars]

4. Blacks are the very heart of the progressive movement.

You are really asking about the tactics adopted by various factions within the Democratic party, not about the "progressive movement." Unfortunately, the question is whether or not those who control the direction of the Party will separate it from the progressive movement (and Blacks and labor and others). If they do choose to be even more complicit in the move toward some sort of corporatist theocracy, they will lose much more than Black support. Many of those who worked hardest during the election are wondering if the Party will choose to fight for the people -- or not.

[angee_is_mad]

12. No! I'm talking about progressives

There are people who call themselves progressives, but they have a very cliquish mindset. Of course this happens with other groups, but I am talking about progressive right now.

It is time for the liberal wing of this party to stop treating Blacks as children and irrelevant until election time.

Some of our so-call liberal politicians who happen to have a passionate fan base on here, seem to not have a sensitivity about Black concerns.

Have you seen the recent posts on here? Especially about reverse discrimination and Black favoritism? If you have, you would notice that I am not preaching to the choir.

I watched the Tavis Smiley forum this weekend about the State of Black America. I wonder how many DUers watched or how long they watched before they changed the channel.

There is a movement that is developing in the Black community and I have a feeling that the democratic party and the so-call progressives will not know what hit them until it is too late.

[me b zola]

25. I watched the forum and was glued to the t.v.

I am white, but my family is multi racial. I have stated in a few other threads that the forum was a shot across the bow of the Democratic party's sinking ship. Although a few issues discussed were specific to the black community, they were almost entirely the issues of traditional Democratic values:
~jobs~living wages~labor unions~health insurance~education~
~election reform/equal access to polls~accountability
of government~accountability of big business~access
to the courts~decreasing the gap between the wealthiest
and the poorest~sustainable communities~reform of the
prison industrial complex~hands off SS & other safety
nets.....

The Democratic party has been overtaken, it seems, by people tied to big business and who clearly don't represent any of us any longer. They call themselves moderates and anyone who reminds them of our Democratic tradition, they call us radicals & the far left.

As I see it, we have shared interest, and I for one am paying attention and shouting from the top of my lungs for others to see.

[papau]

26. I watched - and I did not read Donna's comments as negative as you

What are the "reverse discrimination and Black favoritism" comments by Dems? -

I read that Dems are willing to rephrase the law to not refer to "race" - which is logical as race does not exist - but to instead demand "favoritism" for those whose achievements came after beating back social evil such as attitude toward skin color or being poor and on welfare.

A rich black kid needs affirmative action like he needs a hole in the head - he is a "rich" legacy. Color is not something he needs overcome. But the millions of folks of dark skin color that are not rich and do indeed need to overcome the current social bars to advancement that color brings still need a leg up - as do the white skin colored kids fighting a trailer camp/welfare family barrier.

I wish they had said more than "values grounded in the community" - as in stating specific legislative proposals. Retaining "race" based affirmative action - in lieu of replacement by social barrier based legislation - seems a loser to me. And other black community demands that were specific and not backed by the Democratic Party or Democratic Party treatment that defined "treated blacks like children" went over my head as I just did not hear them. I do not think the party has lost its focus on~jobs~living wages~labor unions~health insurance~education~~election reform/equal access to polls~accountability of government~accountability of big business - access to the courts~decreasing the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest- sustainable communities~reform of the prison industrial complex - hands off SS & other safety nets. Some in office Zell types are not the party.

I think Donna wants more Blacks at the table in the "A" group meetings - and not just because she wants more contracts. I do not see there being a goal difference between the Dem Party and the black community.

[angee_is_mad]

31. I guess Blacks no longer in vogue

because it seems that the party and liberals are trying to get away from race specific issues. Why is that? Is it considered diversive to address issues that has a significance to black(prison, crime)community.

If we address these concerns, are we scared of being viewed as blooding heart liberals and throwing good money after bad by whites that the party is trying to attract?

[papau]

44. race specific issues - versus issues of helping those that need help?

the second seems to include the first for the most part.

And WE ARE BLEEDING HEART LIBERALS - and I for one find that a badge of honor! :-)

As to prison, crime issues, the Federal Gov has little to do with prison rules, and the only crime rules that seem bias are crack versus powder.

By the way, the latest studies indicate more black males are now living with the mother of their kids - even getting married and staying at home! I refuse to credit that to anything Bush has done - but it is nice to see. Of course these studies lag the current date by a few years - perhaps this is the last good news from the Clinton years. :-)

"Conservative" (read anti-gay, and womens rights versus role of male in the family) social values via black churches has always been a fact that the GOP has viewed as a way to pull Blacks into the GOP. I doubt Dem's will lose the Black vote on any other issue.

[ConsAreLiars]

35. This site, like the Dem party, includes many who are not

progressives. The progressive wing of the party should not be confused with some naive or gullible "centrists" or opportunists who believe that standing for nothing is tactically better than fighting for peace and justice. Maybe it is just semantics, but "progressive" doesn't describe these folks in my use of the word. If there are posts on DU advising cutting off the progressive wing of the party, then they aren't being made by progressives. DU is a broad open forum, and many views are posted, ranging from insane hate-mongers (which don't last long) to those within the broader democratic side of things which includes some who would rather compromise and fight another day, plus more than a few dis-info operatives. None of these are progressive.

You repeat the phrase "the democratic party and the so-call progressives" as if the two meant the same thing. Maybe (to the far right) Democrats, liberals, progressives, queers, atheists, terrorists or whatever label is fashionable that day, all these mean the same thing (bad people), but if you cannot distinguish between progressives and those who advocate abandoning progress, then there is not much point in using "progressive" in your commentary.

[Skidmore]

51. Angee, there had better be room and lots of it.

Room needs to be made for not just blacks but every other group going who has supported this party. I too watched the forum and Farahkan had it right, as did Sharpton. The leaders of all those groups, including the leadership of the Democratic party need to form a covenant with their constituents that, as leaders, they will not sell their followers out. We've seen this at all levels for the past decade. I don't think, however, that the issues of the day are color limited. We all have much in common and need to bring every voice and idea to bear to resolve the mess that has been and is still being created in this nation. These are human issues and the common ground we all have is that, as fellow humans, we need to uplift and support one another. I want to see that intense frustration and movement at the grassroots of the party too and I think we've seen some of it. I'm still reserving judgment on the party because now that Dean is there, I want to see some commitment at the top of the party to leadership standing up for the constituency. If they can't do that, then the party doesn't deserve to exist, as far as I'm concerned. Every time you express this opinion, people begin to piles on to tell you that your energies are better spent changing the party from within, and to a certain extent that is true. However, the party is stuck for the time being with the leadership it has. There are Dem legislators who have outlived their usefulness in office and they need to go if they are unwilling to change.

Hell, yes, there is room at the table and at the head of the table. We, liberal and progressive, or liberal progressives, or progressive liberals, need to demand it.

[izzybeans]

53. excellent posts-both of them

I think progressives need a big kick in the pants. I watched the State of the Black Union forum on c-span. It was wonderfully moving. The only thing missing was a few white faces. If there is a big problem with the progressive movement it is treating these forums and consensus conferences as if its "your thing", or even "our thing". There's nothing more effective then the cross-fertilization of ideas and allies where the distinction of "our thing" and "your thing" becomes meaningless. What's mine is yours...at least that's what true allies in progressive fights should be experiencing.

Liberal platitudes on race make people feel warm and fuzzy but many don't understand any longer what they are fighting against. Now a few "progressives" even buy into the reverse discrimination rubbish. "The white male is the new oppressed." Of course they have to ignore pretty much the entirety of american history and nearly all of what constitutes contemporary race relations to actually believe such garbage. The new face of racism hides behind the cloth of past liberal movements (reverse discrimination is just one oxymoronic example-look for others). We live in a time when nobody is racist and yet everyone racializes. Racists no longer percieve the meaning of their own actions because the image of the racist has transformed itself. Tavis' forum taught me that it was time for a redirection and reconceptualization of what it means to "do race" and how to proceed in the most effective ways (constructing a new contract, or covenant). I hope the larger progressive movement starts to transform along with it otherwise it will be left behind not knowing what happened.

[angee_is_mad]

63. Blacks making a covenant

to present to the mainstream. That was the basis of the forum. It was a gathering of black intellectuals, ministers,doctors and grassroots activist coming together to build a contract with demands that will help and benefit the Black community.

I can kinda understand your point, but this was a black issues forum. Just imagine a women's forum to discuss women's issues and inviting men to participate.

Also this was just the starting point. As they mentioned there is a whole lot of work to be done and I am sure more diverse people will be included at a later date. But blacks need to build the foundation of a covenant on black concerns.

[izzybeans]

86. sorry for being unclear

perhaps I'm wrong, but I was speaking about the audience. The audience was not only dissapointing in size but diversity. at least from what I could make out.

Perhaps I'm cherrypicking a very minor point but its something that just sticks out with reference to your first post combined with something a friend of mine is working on. His idea is basically that liberal platitudes of race and racism are outdated. Because of it WE progressives can not acknowledge the contradictory nature of our own practices. Simply put, since we can not accurately point out what a racist is we either are one ourselves, but don't want to be, or aren't but have no ammunition for which to do political battle. The Klan has largely been defrocked (at least they are marginalized to the extent that they must hide in plain site). Violence still persists but is less troublesome than the more widespread symbolic and taken-for-granted manifestations of racism. Imagines of white men who say "reverse discrimination" or some equally oxymoronic term need to replace the older vision of violence. perhaps the new image can best be defined as "the pedagody of the oppressor". Not in terms of normative economic and institutional structures, but the new racist dicourse popping up all over the place. I saw this same sentiment underlying some of the comments, especially at the end when they rushed through the final statements. 'The "new" evil', though they meant it much more broadly and directing differently than I am presenting it, has a different face. If progressives, especially white progressives are complacent, its because they no longer comprehend the new face of their opponent. For me it takes consistent relearning and consistent being put into place to recognize something I've conditioned myself not to see. No one likes to admit when they are mistaken but maybe that's what needs to happen. Try holding a discussion about race in a classroom. Many white kids are paralyzed by a fear of not only being percieved as a racist but being one. I think this is so because the image of what a racist is no longer clear. They just don't get it and those that think they do often say some wildly uncomfortable things (perhaps something I'm doing now). Likewise when discussions about race happen here at DU they inevitably fall apart into spasms of either "baiting" or finger pointing. I suppose its just people crossing lines they can not see, and do not want to see. But regardless, progressives want to be, desire to be, and are allies on this issue no matter their pigmentation. I think if they were more in tune to things like this conference then their understading of "what is a racist?" and "what shall we do about it?" will become much more organized than it is at this point.

Without this image no one will be able to identify it until its too late. "Urban schools" will be written out of budget proposals without a second thought, teachers will make assumptions that do not capture the childs imagination, or his/her being, employers will look past potential candidates, and the so called "self" imposed subjegation will remain steadily in place.

[JanMichael]

66. I'm a "white" Lefty that can acknowledge my ignorance toward "black"...

...issues and concerns. I'm aware of much of the history, events and such, but it's still hard to understand exactly how different my experiances are from other folks.

I have a friend who's a high ranking police officer that still gets harassed by security guards at stores when he's not in uniform and carrying his gun. It's unfreakin' believable the shit that "blacks" have to put up with beyond the economic class issues that I work on.

That said I've been a part of an "Undoing Racism" weekend and my direct supervisor is a "black" woman so at the very least I grasp that there's still much work to be done.

[ikojo]

115. I am watching the rebroadcast at this very moment

I find it very interesting. Many things of importance to the black community are also of concern (or should be) to working class Americans of all races. There is a war on workers and it is being led by the TWO major parties who answer to corporate America.

Martin Luther King was not really shot for his civil rights work. He was targeted and shot IMHO because he was moving to a more class based politics and in America CLASS is the great unspoken.

[EFerrari]

156. Hi, Angee. I'm not sure what your aim is in this thread.

There's so much anger in the OP, after working all night, I just have to put it over for the morning.

We just came back from an NAACP Youth benefit at the San Francisco Punchline. Doug was the only white comic on the bill. It was hilarious, even before the comedy.

Be mad. We're all mad. But, let's be mad and be smart.

peace,
Beth

[cry baby]

190. Angee, I watched and was heartened to hear some of the best and

brightest of our country speaking with wonderful clarity and vision. I am not black, but I caught the replay really late at night and it was sooo good that I couldn't close my eyes and go to sleep. I felt that they were speaking not only for blacks, but for everyone that has a conscience. They certainly have great ideas. My hope is that they have a huge voice in the Dem. party and are not treated like they don't matter.

I have seen a few nasty threads of a racial nature, but this is a huge community as you know. There will always be disruptors and/or people that just don't have much common sense.

I would venture a guess that 95% or more at DU care a great deal about the black concerns because they are all of our concerns. The Dems really need the black vote and I hope they work to earn it. I can pretty much guarantee that the repubs don't govern with black people in mind.

[pauliedee]

170. Blacks are the Democratic Party

Blacks are the Democratic Party except for the idiot Tavis Smiley who thinks we should split our and let the Repugs push further oppression, voter suppression and attack civil rights and take u spack to slavery. Smiley needs to wake up! @!#$%^&*(!!!

[CindyDale]

6. The party has to become more than a sidekick to the Republicans

and then there should be a place for everyone.

Otherwise, people will give up on a two-party system. I don't mean just Democrats; there are many disillusioned Republicans as well. That kind of change might not be a bad thing, but if the Democrats don't want that, they need to become, well, more democratic.

[Syrinx]

7. a brief comment and a brief question

I thought all of us on the Left, or on the left side of the center, were all in this together. You say that blacks only receive "crumbs." What is it that progressive blacks want that the rest of progressives don't?

ON EDIT: Let me give the short version of what I want from the government.

I want the government to treat all people the same regardless of race, color or sexual orientation. I want to see some trust-busting going on -- an end to corporate consolidation. I want to see an end to the foolish and evil drug war. I want to empty the prisons of marijuana users to make room for corporate criminals. I want an end to homelessness and hunger. I want college for everyone that is qualified and wants it. I want an end to laws based solely on religious beliefs. I want to see respect for unions and collective bargaining. I want peaceful leaders that seek to solve international conflicts through negotiation and compromise (though, I still want the strongest military, because the world is a dangerous place).

Mainly, I want a truly free and compassionate nation, where individuals can live their lives as they see fit, and reach their full potentials. Some parts of government I would make bigger, others I would make smaller. :)

[WillowTree]

8. Oh boy!

"Is there a place for Blacks in the progressive party, besides delivering 90% of the Black vote election after election and receiving crumbs as a result?"

That's a question I've been asking for a long time now. Wish I knew what answer those who have the power to decide that would give, not by their words, but by their action.

I guess we'll find out.

[Enquiringkitty]

9. I agree that blacks are not listened to. I have always been a

Democrat and I would have to also agree that the Democratic Party has not done enough to bring in the average Black citizen. Most of the Black actors promote the Democratic Party and the upper class Black business leaders are shown on the stage while speeches are being made and some speak at meetings but the Democratic Party needs to have average Black people play a much bigger part, add their views,lend their opinions, and become more of a guiding force in the party.

I think there is room for a third party in this country but the conservative wave sweeping across this country and the "either you are like me or you're not" feeling that is growing, a third party might have a hard time gaining momentum. In the future, if the conservatives get to vocal, a third party might be the only way that a liberal can be heard without being called unAmerican, insane, or any of the other lame labels I hear.

If one of the platforms of the Democratic Party is going to be the belief that no American is a lesser American due to race, creed, or sexual orientation, then we need to show that and bring them in and place them in the forefront of the campaign plan.

[Spider Jerusalem]

10. That's kind of a silly question.

It's a bit like asking "Is there a place for blacks in America?"

I do think that it's important that the Democratic Party stop simply taking the black vote for granted and do more to actively address the concerns of the black community. Diversity is a good thing, but there needs to be more than just superficial "look at us, aren't we inclusive" "diversity"...there's a need for a diversity of voices that are heeded in guiding the course of the Democratic Party and ensuring that its policies and goals reflect the desires of its supposed constituency. Lip service isn't enough.

[Radical Activist]

11. Dems are already losing because of this

What % of African-Americans actually vote? Democrats would have won the last two presidential elections if we had nominees that actually did something significant for the black community and took them seriously during the election.

[angee_is_mad]

17. Preach!!!!!!

What other constituency has been more faithful to this party that the Black community?

For the earlier post that ask what do Blacks want? RESpect!

After the respect is duly given, here are a few things that need to be addressed and honestly worked on.

Work to change the penal laws that are targeted at Black males. And once he gets out of jail and try to change his life around award him financial aid for college and not with hold it because of his record. Allow him to vote!

Make it possible that there is another way for a young Black person can go to college without having to sign up fight a war.

Educate or penalize doctors who will prescribe one type of medication to a black women irregardless of the negative side efforts that she is not notified about.

Penalize predatory lenders who prey on Blacks in working class and poor neighborhoods. Get rid of those Payday loan companies that are forcing people into bankruptcy.

These are just a few things.

[bling bling]

20. I have some more ideas.

Where are the Dems outrage at the way our educational system is funded? I don't know how it is where you live, but in my city and county our public schools receive the majority of their funding from personal property taxes in their districts.

Great idea,if you happen to live in a wealthy suburb where property taxes are enough to fund education. But in the city, where the housing consists mainly of low-income housing and apartments, the funding is a joke. A joke. And more and more people with children move OUT of the city because of the poor school-system, making the problem even worse. It's like educational genocide.

And I don't think our city is unique in the fact that the urban and poor areas tend to also have the lowest funding for public education.

It's a cause the Dems should be screaming about, but I never hear a word about it. Maybe we should start writing letters to our reps about it. It's their job to come up with legislation to fix these kinds of problems. And if they don't listen, what would we do next?

[realisticphish]

33. not just urban

out here in the stix the funding is just as bad. the pattern remains... poor people get the shaft :shrug:


:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[bling bling]

36. You're exactly right.

And how long has this same problem existed year after year? I know it never gets better where I live. Instead of abstract ideas about being the party of "education", we need real solutions to the problems of how we're going to adjust how funds are allocated to finally and specifically reach urban, poor, and rural areas. Enough is enough.

[realisticphish]

37. my high school

lead the challenge to the Ohio school funding system (based on property taxes). It was declared unconstitutional by the Ohio SC, but of course the repuke-controlled general assembly has been dragging their feet for years. i want to grab every one of those fuckers and take them down to Corning, in southern Perry County, OH, and show them the falling buildings, leaking ceilings, ancient textbooks, and a sickening lack of any equipment at all. show them the kids who simply cant go anywhere cause they don't get a quality education. pull them down from their ivory tower, and show them that Ohio is not just the rich suburbs of Columbus.

And the exact same problems happen just a few miles from those rich suburbs, as well. it disgusts me. my mother was a teacher, and education is one of my top issues.


:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[More Than A Feeling]

21. This is a program I can totally sign on to

and I say that as someone who is probably more conservative than the majority on this board.

people who have paid their debt to society should not be continually dogged for it. Its plain discrimination is what it is. What point prison, if after people get out they will still be treated like they are in?

College is something everyone should have a chance to experience. Its good for society, its good for the economy (and it will grow the party, which ain't bad either!)

Anyone being prescribed medication should be fully aware of the consequences of taking said medication, before they take it! If black women are not getting this, that is a shame that I was previously unaware of.

predatory lenders must be penalized to the fullest extent of the law. Preying on the poor is a sin.

How about representation for Washington DC? That is something else that should be on the list, and I support that as well.

[Syrinx]

24. the issues you suggest aren't "black" issues

Aren't you for a you White person being able to go to college without having to sign up to fight a war?

Should white women be poisoned by their doctors?

Should white workers be screwed by predatory lenders?

Should white ex-cons be denied the right to vote?

[angee_is_mad]

27. Blacks are disproportionately affected

There are more Blacks in the military than whites, as far as medication the information is sometimes not readily accessible to them and they assume that the doctor knows best.

There are more pawnshops and Payday loan companies in Black neighborhoods that white. Maybe you should ride around a working class or poor neighborhood in your town and take a count.

Also your response has proved my point. When Blacks raise concerns about their lives and community the party try to generalize it. I guess their concerns are not significant!

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[mark414]

40. um...

the person that you're referring to, IS black

just so you know

also, blacks are only 12% of the population...you need to take that into account when referencing your other numbers

[Syrinx]

42. I realized that angee is black -- why should that matter?

And I know the numbers. She said "There are more Blacks in the military than whites."

What did I say that was wrong?

[angee_is_mad]

69. So race doesn't matter?

As far as you are concerned? That is what I am getting from your posts and the other threads that you have responded to.

[ultraist]

91. Anyone who thinks race doesn't matter is very uneducated on the issue

There is a wealth of info out there for the taking including former Harvard professor, Cornell West's, "Race Matter's" works by Dubois, famous civil rights activists and social theorist, and numerous other scholarly works listed at this site:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hsb207b/readings.html

[Syrinx]

105. your race doesn't matter in this context

Someone pointed out that you are black. Your race has no bearing on what I say to you on this board.

[tsuki]

141. angee, if it is any help. My father came off a dirt farm in Northern

Alabama in 1947, before he graduated from high school, and joined the military to provide a better life for his family than he could staying in a depressed town with no opportunities.

Yes, there may be a disportionate number of blacks in the military, but how many are there for the same reason as my dad? In my day, there were a disportionate number of southerners in the military.

You cannot fault a man for trying to make it better for his own.

My problem is that we cannot, as a nation, withdraw from the committments we have made to those military men. Education, medical care, retirement, VA and DVA benefits.

[Syrinx]

38. and how is it that "information is less available to them?"

?

[bling bling]

39. Historically, all subjects medical, academic, scientific

were written by and for men. For example, in psychology, the models developed were done so through interviews and experimentation using only white male subjects. Then, they took these models and applied them to everyone. The problem is, that the models didn't always fit for other genders and cultures. The same thing applies to medication. Minorities are often under-represented or not represented at all in studies. This has presented dangerous outcomes when minorities develop side affects that didn't show up when the medication was tested on non-minorities. The problem has been identified but still, many doctors treating a non-white patient don't take time to consider and research and provide information about the unique reactions that meds they prescribe may have on that non-white person.

[Syrinx]

43. that's not what she said

She wasn't talking about details of research. That's a different discussion.

[bling bling]

45. I wasn't talking about details of research either.

Although I used that to preface my argument that black women are more likely to receive medication from a doctor that will adversely affect them without their being informed about it compared to white women.

The doctor has a responsibility, before prescribing a medication, to consider, look into, and inform a patient of specific side effects that may only apply specifically to a particular cultural/ethnic group.

[Syrinx]

47. cool

That's not an issue of racial politics.

I ask God to bless you as a doctor. Doctors deserve all praise.

[Syrinx]

55. where did you get the idea there are more blacks in the military?

Blacks make up about 28% of the Army and 18% of the Navy. And whites are much more likely to be killed, as they are disproportionately on the front lines, while blacks tend to serve in support roles.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-20-army-race-usat-_x.htm

[izzybeans]

58. Poor statistical skills: try comparing the proportions-then

talk about likelihoods/probabilities. Do African-American males make up 28% of the U.S. population? 18%? Nope.

[Syrinx]

104. poor reading skills

I was responding to the declaration that "most" people in the military are black. That is simply not the case.

[izzybeans]

118. I think you'll agree that angee was speaking in probabilistic terms

even if he or she misspoke. It sounds like you are splitting hairs here. the fact is african americans are more likely to be in the armed forces and more likely to die in combat.

i was responding to your wording not her's anyway.

"Blacks make up about 28% of the Army and 18% of the Navy. And whites are much more likely to be killed, as they are disproportionately on the front lines, while blacks tend to serve in support roles."


The article you cite can not explain, through its use of "a small group of experts" the demographics of dieing in combat. It also never speaks of proportions. Without doing so they load the deck and talk in meaningless ways. It's comparing two different metrics, basically.

[ultraist]

135. Is someone just trying to pick a fight and be disruptive?

It certainly appears so.

[izzybeans]

157. who are you speaking to?

If me I suggest you read my prior posts b/c I'm completely on board with the premise of this thread.

[ultraist]

168. No, I was not speaking about you

Sorry for the confusion. I was referring to the poster who keeps using diversion tactics.

[izzybeans]

186. Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to everything this person said.

I see what you mean. If I paid closer attention I would have understood. I hated to phrase my question like that because it looked kind of awkward on the screen. If I could have said it out loud it would have appeared much differently.

[Syrinx]

151. fine

The only thing I object to here is to always try to divide people into opposing subsets. Like it or not, we are all in this thing together. I want the best for all people, regardless of color, ethnicity or sexual orientation, etc. Thats why I asked what special desires African-American progressives have that aren't being addressed by the wider progressive community. I don't want black people to be victimized by predatory lending or by the drug companies. I don't think black people should have to fight a war to go to college, and I think black ex-cons should be able to vote. Same goes for white people, Hispanics, and Asians, too. Is that really such an objectionable point of view?

[LDS Jock]

166. Why are you capitalizing black, but not white?

Why does Black get capitalized?

[ProgressiveConn]

50. Agreed. And by making it an ethnic issue it only hurts reform hopes. nt

[Enquiringkitty]

28. All poor people suffer from all of these listed. They need to be changed

What you didn't bring up is that a Black person is more likely to be convicted of a crime when a white man in court on a more serious charge will get off .... even if the evidence is strong in both cases. Also racial profiling is a big issue.

[Sapphire Blue]

48. John Edwards dared to talk about....

.... the 'two Americas', poverty, predatory lenders, and other vital issues. We need to continue that conversation, and elect candidates who truly represent us..... before & after the elections.

Yes, there is sooooo much room for everyone in this tent..... and when there isn't enough room, we'll just have to get a bigger tent.

[ultraist]

65. Edwards also talked about racism

[shadowknows69]

13. I'm white

and also pretty sick of showing up at the polls and getting crumbs. The system as it is today doesn't want the disenfranchised to show up and vote anyway.

[Califooyah Operative]

14. I hope there's a place for blacks in the progressive movement....

but i don't agree with you that this country is moving to the right. The problem with our party is being fixed as we speak. I completely agree though that the democratic ought to take a stance against the obvious disinfranchisement of minority voters, as well as giving more of an ear to people of all backgrounds. Part of the success of this movement, is reliant on the ability for the various interests groups united under progressive value, principles, and policy/agenda; to work together, and to be inclusive and respectful of each other.

[bling bling]

15. Funny you should say that.

On many levels blacks ARE the democratic party. At least the core of it. Pretty amazing how under-represented blacks are as representatives in government, isn't it?

I'm tired of it. After this last election I even posted that I'm tired of voting for either a rich white man or another rich white man. Nothing against men in general but it's time for a change.

I'm tired of hearing this country isn't "ready" for black leaders or women leaders. How much longer are we going to wait before we either MAKE the country ready or boycott the system in revolt?? I think the 2008 election will be my breaking point. I'm watching closely to see if the Democrats will dare put forth someone other than yet another cookie-cutter rich white man to represent a party that consists of disproportionately few rich white men.

[Enquiringkitty]

16. I am really hoping for a bright future for Obama on the national

level. He seems to me to be one of the most powerful weapons for progress and change. He is very likable, got a great background, makes a lot of great points and comes across as rational and steady. He seems to really draw you in when he speaks. I think most of us can get behind him and we might just steal quite a few Reps too.

[angee_is_mad]

18. Ditto, but

I do not have a problem with a rich white man on the ticket, it just depends on which rich white man. We can't fall in the trap of voting for a minority just because they are minorities. Remember Colin Powell, Condi, and Gonzales.

Hilary is becoming republican like everyday, but I understand the strategy she is using. I have a feeling it is not going to work this time.

Sometimes the power isn't who is in the front, but who is in the back. Think Karl Rove.

[Swamp Rat]

19. "The Lizard of Oz"

[ultraist]

76. eeewww...he has got to be the most disgusting creature on this planet!!!

[bling bling]

22. There's 250,000,000 people in this country.

We need to have leaders who represent us. We're women, we're men, we're poor, we're working class, we're black, we're white, hispanic, etc. Every four years we get the same representation. Time for a change.

[Spider Jerusalem]

23. Closer to three hundred million, now...

[Enquiringkitty]

30. Again, What about Obama? He is multi cultural, has a lot of energy

People in Chicago seem to love him .......?

[bling bling]

34. From what I've seen so far from Obama

I would get behind him and support him 100%. I would be gleeful if the Dem's ran him. A lot of people hesitate about him because he's a junior senator but if Bush the dunderhead can serve two terms then I don't think experience will be a problem with Obama. The dems should get him out in front of cameras now. Get people familiar with his face, his name. Americans will feel like he's been around forever.

[tsuki]

144. Have we forgotten

John Conyers Jr.
Stephanie Tubbs Jones
Jesse Jackson Jr.
Charles Rangel
Melvin Watt
Shirley Jackson Lee
Corrine Brown
Maxine Waters

There are more, but these are the representatives that I saw that are very worthy of respect. They are leaders. And I am proud of them. (I wish there were more democrats in the house so that John Conyers could have called a true meeting.)

[me b zola]

29. !

:grouphug:

[The Traveler]

46. In my view, it is not only possible

but it is absolutely necessary. Black Americams, for whatever reason, are today more capable of "thinking outside the box" than whitebread types like, well, me. We do need their votes. But more than this we need their practicality, their street smarts, their courage and grace under pressure.

I could apply the same words to Native Americans. Both have survived centuries of oppression. Only the strong survive ...

And both understand if we are not a tribe together, then in the long run we will be nothing.

[mandyky]

49. I think the progressive movement is MORE accepting

and inclusive towards minorities than the party machinery used to be.
I watched the forum all the way through Sat. and I agree with Tavis' idea to have this contract. (I've been watching this forum every year since it started)

Unfortunately, between Rev Al and Farakan a lot of time got ate up with "preaching by big egos" rather that discussing this contract idea.

If this "contract committee" wants to be part of the progressive movement maybe they'll invite some progressive people as well as preachers when they write up this thing. I hope the public gets to see this contract once it is written. I have been saying since the elections (and before) that Democrats need to join their local NAACP chapter and other such organizations.

[ultraist]

96. There were not only leaders of the faith community at that Panel

There were attorneys, activists, and politicians.

It would be foolish to shut out the faith community leaders from discussion. The Black faith community is very strong and has historically been involved in the political dialogue. The most obvious example of such is Martin Luther King, Jr, a political activist from the faith based community.

BTW, Sharpton is also a political activist and former Presidential candidate.

[mandyky]

101. I did not say shut them out

If you watched the forum, you know the first panel with Farakan and Sharpton went over time, and it rushed the second afternoon panel.
What I said is that as well as having clergy there, make sure some progressives who aren't clergy there.

[ultraist]

125. They had other progressives this time and everytime, not just clergy

So why wouldn't they for future meetings? They always do for political forums. Farakhan and Sharpton weren't the only ones on the first panel.There were also politicians and activists.

I obviously have a different opinion about Farrakhan and Sharpton than you do. I think they both had powerful and uplifting messages.

[H2O Man]

52. Blacks are leading

the progressive movement in the democratic party. The real question is will the non-black democrats recognize that leadership. There is the "neoliberal" branch of the democratic party, which resents and resists that black leadership. I would suggest that there is very little support for the neoliberals on DU, and that the vast majority of non-black DUers are hoping that the progressive black leadership will continue to take bold steps in state and national politics.

[Bridget Burke]

54. Are Blacks sitting at home waiting to be courted?

They did not win Civil Rights by letting White Liberals do their fighting. They preached & marched & won--with some allies.

My own rep is Sheila Jackson Lee. Previous holders of her seat were Barbara Jordan & Mickey Leland. None of these people sat on the couch & waited for the Democrats to woo them. They led.

[Tomee450]

56. I agree totally.

I believe that if the Democratic Party goes further to the right, it will lose a lot of black voters who just won't vote at all.

[Sapphire Blue]

62. If the Democratic Party goes further to the right

it'll lose a lot of voters... period.

[K-W]

67. If the party goes right, it will mean that people voted for right wing dem

it will mean that democracy is dead completely, or it will mean that we truely are the minority.

Either way, it wont be the fault of the democratic party, it will be the fault of the people that elected a conservative slate of candidates into office in the democratic party.

[Sapphire Blue]

73. Let me rephrase....

If the leadership of the Democratic Party moves further to the right and promotes right-wing dems, it will lose voters.... period.

Let's see which way this goes. I'm hoping that the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party will prevail.

[K-W]

74. But that isnt how it works.

We dont have proportional representation.

The party's ideology is determined by which people get elected, not vice-versa. Or at least thats supposed to be the idea.

The current ideology of the party reflects the people who got elected in recent elections. Yes it should certainly be reflected in those politicians' bids for office, but to judge other democrats by thier ideology is to completely misunderstand our system.

Until we start having actual elections based on parties, falling into the trap of party voting is just that, falling into a trap. Its about electing PEOPLE who support the right things. If enough people who support the right things are elected, the caucuses they occupy will support the right things.

The democratic party is just a structure. What matters is which individual people get elected as democrats.

[K-W]

57. You are spreading republican lies.

Nobody is being pimped.

THE DEMOCRATS HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO POWER AND A FRACTURED PARTY

They arent getting anything done for anybody. Nobody is being played, taken advantage of, etc etc. The democratic politians are generally well meaning but clueless. Democratic voters are also generally well meaning but clueless.

Our nation is on the brink of outright facism because of criminal conspiricies and corruption in government and you still think the democrats are at fault for the fact that everything is twisted out of control?

[Tomee450]

61. I think the

Democratic party could have done more to oppose this administration. For a long time very few Democrats would even criticize Bush. The party did not fight the disenfranchisement of voters in 2000 and are doing very little about the irregularities clearly evident in the last election. The Democrats voted for the Iraq War, the Patriot Act,and some even support the bankruptcy law being introduced by this administration. How often did Dashle stand up to this administration? He would rarely express outrage and on the few occasions he did so, backed down the minute he was criticized.

Of course the main culprit is this Republican regime. However, the Democrats have too often failed to be the loyal opposition.

As far as blacks are concerned, Al Sharpton said blacks holding leadership positions in the party are far fewer than in previous years. It was a democrat, Bill Clinton, who signed the welfare reform bill which has hurt so many poor people. Bill Clinton also supported the death penalty even though blacks are more often given capital punishment. The Democrats have done nothing about the drug laws which have ruined the lives of so many blacks. I never hear any democrats other than members of the black caucus even discussing the matter. Where are the democrats when it comes to getting ex-felons the right to vote? There are reasons why so many blacks are becoming increasingly unhappy with the Democrats. The party needs to start addressing these issues that are so important to black people. The party leadership should really review a tape of Tavis Smiley's forum. Those speakers expressed the sentiments of many in the black community.

[K-W]

64. Hindsight is 20/20

of course they could have done better. Of course. But the fact that democrats make mistakes isnt the problem we face, the problem we face is the right wing.

If we can defeat the right wing and win the hearts and minds of america over to the ideas of liberty and democracy, the democrats will be making mistakes while producing wonderful progressive reforms.

Instead they make mistakes while they, and the entire left suffer at the hands of a group of criminals and cheaters with resources we can only dream of.

[angee_is_mad]

71. but dems have been in power recently

and the faithful still haven't been invited to dance. They are told to be patient and wait and wait and wait. That's even worse in my book.

[K-W]

72. I dont agree.

The Dems havent had the power to shape the agenda of the nation since before the reagan revolution. Clinton spent his 8 years on the defensive. The Democrats lost the battle for control of the debate long before clinton.

Look, my point isnt so much that democrats havent sucked. They have, its that what makes them democrats is simply that they won elections and registered as democrats. We cant let the actions of the democrats of the past, who were elected under right wing engineered conditions poisen our hope for democrats in the future.

The party is who is elected. If we can control who is elected, we can control the party, if we cant... we cant. The democrats didnt turn on anything, the democrats arent capable of such things. The problem is which democrats got elected and why. We only need to fear the trend continuing if we are never able to make an impact in elections, and if thats the case our problem is bigger than who gets elected.

[Sapphire Blue]

70. Count every vote act of 2005

Senators Clinton and Boxer, Representative Tubbs Jones and Others to Unveil Major Election Reform Bill:

http://clinton.senate.gov/~clinton/news/2005/2005217501.html



Count Every Vote Act Introduced; 100,000 Citizen Co-Sponsors:

http://www.friendsofhillary.com/home.php


Be a citizen co-sponsor of the Count Every Vote Act:

http://www.friendsofhillary.com/


Full text of the Count Every Vote Act of 2005:

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/dfiles/file_493.pdf

[usregimechange]

59. You better speak up. And you will always be welcome to share &

Help.

[ultraist]

60. The Black America Panel was so INSPIRING!

Farakhan, Jackson, Sharpton, and Lowry were amazing. Blacks know well how to draw on the strengths of their faith community.

I agree with what was said, that a convenant is needed. It's due time white Democrats are called to the table. There has been way too much lip service and not enough action. Dean also said it, 'it's DUE TIME more Blacks are appointed to powerful positions in the party and represented equally. It's time Democrats take more action to secure equal rights.'

In our great country, the percentage of Blacks in poverty is THREE TIMES what it is for Whites in poverty. We have so much unaddressed RACISM in this country. THIS IS SHAMEFUL. We should be LEADING THE WAY on equal rights as Democrats.

The dispartites in health care, education, income, poverty, LIFE SPAN, infant mortality rate, incarceration rates, are DEPISCABLE AND EVERY DEMOCRAT SHOULD BE ASHAMED that we have allowed this to continue.

This is about civil rights and equal opportunity for EVERYONE; it is MORAL ISSUE. Do you want your children and others' children to inherit a racist oppressive violent society? I sure don't.

And to my fellow whites: Opposing Affirmative Action and other social programs that create equal opportunity is RACIST. IGNORING AND DENYING racism, in all forms, is RACIST. The reverse racism argument is flawed and intellectually dishonest, it is a LIE.

Whites have nothing to lose if they get honest about racism, but we have a LOT to lose if we don't get honest and take more action.

[angee_is_mad]

68. be careful with your statistics

on here. There are some people who will not appreciate seeing those numbers, but I DO appreciate your post.

There seems to be a few libertarians on here or ppl with hidden agendas when it comes to race. Where is the Love?

[walldude]

75. Libertarians or people with hidden adjendas?

So what? Libertarians are racist? Why is it we need to seperate race, gender, sexuality, blah, blah, blah... We are all humans here,(well most of us) to be progressive is to be tolerant and accepting. I assumed that went without saying and frankly am suprised by the need for this thread..

[Misunderestimator]

78. great example directly above...

:eyes:

[walldude]

84. Great example of what?

The question the thread asked was not "does racism need to be addressed" but "is there room for Blacks in the progressive movement". Sorry if I assumed that most people are like me and feel the answer would be yes without question. It's so ingrained in me I didn't see the need to ask the question. If you want to pretend that I am racist because I believe it was a stupid question then be my guest..

Oh and I'm not Libertarian either, I just never thought of them as racist.

[angee_is_mad]

87. Libertarians are not racist

but as in any group including democrats I am sure that there are some that are.

My point about libertarians is that they believe in less government and I would assume that would mean less money for social programs that are beneficial to minorities and the poor.

[Syrinx]

152. I'm a libertarian, but not a Libertarian

By libertarian, I mean that I believe that victimless crimes should not be crimes at all. You know things like drugs, prostitution, pornography, peaceful protest, etc. I part ways with the Libertarian Party, because they have what I consider to be truly stupid ideas, like privatizing not only Social Security, but also the Interstate Highway system.

I'm all for social programs for the poor, and that is one of the main reasons I consider myself to be a Democrat.

[Misunderestimator]

88. Of the kind of narrow-mindedness that Black people must experience

every day. Apparently you didn't read the whole thread. You seem to think it said "blah, blah, blah" which I can only surmise to mean that you didn't read it.

You ask why we need to address racism separately. You imply by saying ""Why is it we need to seperate race, gender, sexuality, blah, blah, blah... " that there is no problem with racism or sexism or bigotry against gays.

You say "We are all humans here,(well most of us) to be progressive is to be tolerant and accepting." which is all fine and dandy for those progressives who are enlightened enough to understand the need to address problems in our society, but it DOESN'T apply to everyone. And if you really were progressive, you would know that, and you would know that there is great inequity in this country related to race, gender and "sexuality" as you put it.

And your closing of "I assumed that went without saying and frankly am suprised by the need for this thread" is the type of dismissal that is typical from those who don't care about the problems of others, as if since they have worked it all out in their heads, there IS no problem.

Perfect example.

[walldude]

112. Yeah whatever..

Apparently you either misunderstand me or you are baiting me. I know there is prejudice, I know it needs to be addressed, what I don't think is that we need is a thread actually asking if Blacks should have a place in the progressive movement. Why isn't there a thread asking if women should have a place, or Gays or Jews? To be honest I find the question pointless and semi-racist itself, and I find your responses to my posts odd at best. Being a Jew, I've been on the receiving end of "narrow mindedness", I also have a gay son and my share of friends from all races. If any of my friends in the real world heard you say I don't care about other peoples problems or that I don't think there is a prejudice problem in this country they'd be um... slightly wondering who this person is, who apparently has no idea who I am, and who came up with these hilarious accusations...

I'll give you this, my choice of using Blah, Blah, Blah, was wrong, it should have been etc, etc.

[bling bling]

120. So.....

Instead of having a discussion about it, when someone brings up legitimate issues that really should be addressed by the party they are voters for... we should just say, "want some cheese with that whine? oh yeah, well, what about this group or that group, they have problems too...."

and end of discussion??

I don't think that's the best way to engage people in a productive dialog. Maybe we should just stick to threads talking about how much we hate Bush. Now THAT'S productive.

[walldude]

124. So you think questioning whether or not Blacks should

be "allowed" into the "progressive" club is productive? I'm confused, I thought this was a progressive liberal board where we are accepting of all races, creeds, religions and sexual orientations. Sorry my mistake..

[bling bling]

127. You're losing the message in the delivery.

I didn't read the headline literally. Maybe if you read the OP again trying to discern the message from the literal words, you will see it differently.

[walldude]

134. You are probably right about that

I started my posts while I was at work and was doing other things at the same time, then it just got um.... out of hand when I was accused of being apathetic... :toast:

[bling bling]

136. Understood.

:)

:toast:

[Misunderestimator]

122. Because it is THIS thread asking it. Why should it be all-encompassing?

What on earth are you talking about? That no single issues should be addressed specifically? That we must always talk about ALL minorities when we talk about one?

[bling bling]

123. I think it was Pale Blue Dot talking about Rice.

Not walldude.

[Misunderestimator]

126. Ah... you're right, but the first part of my post still stands...

and the last part still stands for walldude even if I erased it.

:hi: thanks.

[bling bling]

129. Yes, and I agree with your post.

:hi:

[walldude]

130. Did I just step into the Twilight Zone?

Where did I mention that freaking lying traitor Condeleeza Rice in any of my posts? I said nothing about anyone specific and mentioned noone as a "role model". My only point was that, and I'll make this very clear, IMHO there was no need for this question, in my mind progressive groups accept all people regardless of race, creed, religion without having to ask if there is a place for them. If you would like to argue against that be my guest, but don't take the cheap way out and put words in my mouth.

[Misunderestimator]

138. Why would you post FIVE MINUTES after I edited my post to remove

the Rice reference because I realized that particular mistake, and then only answer the deleted part of the post? Did you really spend five minutes coming up with that response?

[walldude]

142. Well I must have because

when I started the post your "mistake" was still there. Pardon me for having 3 children who have to do their homework and get ready for bed. While you may have no life other than this board I have a wife with muscular distrophy, an autistic child and 2 other children who all vie for my attention besides you. So maybe you ought to back the F*** of my case, especially considering it was your mistake.

[Misunderestimator]

143. Would you like to go back and respond to my post now...

or just rant?

[walldude]

146. Well since you didn't read it the first time

I'll post my response again:

"My only point was that, and I'll make this very clear, IMHO there was no need for this question, in my mind progressive groups accept all people regardless of race, creed, religion without having to ask if there is a place for them. If you would like to argue against that be my guest, but don't take the cheap way out and put words in my mouth"
Ok? Is that clear enough for you?

Oh and that wasn't ranting I was genuinely angry that you had the nerve to put someone else's words in my mouth then berate me for not responding fast enough to your taste.

[Misunderestimator]

148. In your mind perhaps... but not in all people's minds. My question...

however, was why you thought it unnecessary to talk about a specific minority's problems... your listing all those other groups in your post certainly implied that you felt it unnecessary to talk about the problems of black americans. Yes, it SHOULD be what every progressive strives for... but unfortunately, it isn't... therefore it needs to be discussed whether you think so or not.

Words in your mouth? Because I originally confused you in the last part of my post with another poster? How funny that even though I admitted that small mistake, you judge me for it... :eyes:

[walldude]

150. No, when I replied you hadn't "fixed" your mistake

so at the time I didn't know it had been fixed. Then you berated me for taking to long to respond, because you had already fixed it by the time my post made it up. (I appreciate that you fixed it BTW but it was hardly a small mistake, saying I called Rice a role model, thats almost like slapping me in the face)
Anyway, lets get off the he-said he-said argument and back to the meat of the discussion. I obviously took this question the wrong way because I ended up being labeled apathetic and racist which is far from the truth. I just found the question odd. In another post further below I said what the question seemed to be saying to me, and in the way that I took it, the question itself seemed racist. I don't think that it's "unnecessary to talk about any minority's problems. That wasn't how I took the question. I took it too literally as bling bling so kindly pointed out to me. So if I offended anyone I apologize. On the other hand if I were "leader" of the progressives that question would never have needed to be asked because I'd be leading the fight for equality, among everyone.
Hope that clears things up, and if it doesn't my kids go to bed in 5 minutes and I'll be able to finish an entire coherent thought without being interrupted

[ultraist]

79. Why is it we need to address racism?

:eyes:

I realize that the platform of the Libertarian party opposes ANY social programs, but the DEMOCRATS do NOT oppose social programs nor do they oppose addressing racism.

Even Senator Reid said, we have serious problems with racism, especially the insideous forms of racism and we need to address this social ill.

The fact is, addressing racism and working on these issues will also help to lift up poor whites.

[angee_is_mad]

85. I'm surprise

that you do not realize that there is a need for this thread, but then again I guess I shouldn't be.

[ultraist]

98. I guess we also shouldn't talk about Gay rights issues. SILENCE everyone.

Let's stick our heads in the sand and pretend these social problems don't exist and maybe they will just disappear. Right!

[walldude]

119. But your question wasn't "Does racism need to be addressed"

Your question seemed to me to be "Should we let blacks into our progressive little club". I wouldn't want to be part of a group that feels it needs to ask that question...

[ultraist]

132. That was NOT her question! Remove your quotation marks!

The question was, "Is there a place..." meaning, have white Democrats made sure Black Democrats have their rightful place at the table? The answer is NO, they have not. Just as Dean said. We have NOT appointed Blacks as much as we should have nor have we included them in the power meetings of the DNC appropriately. We have not financially backed Black candidates as much as we have white candidates.

I'd like to see the DNC records of how much money was donated to Black candidates over the last several years.

It takes a party to get a candidate elected, it's not just the votes. A candidate needs BIG BUCKS and BIG BACKING to be able to compete.

BTW, there is a club, a white good ole boys club and it's time they have their toes held to the fire and be forced to OPEN THE DOOR.

[bling bling]

92. If you're surprised by the need for this thread.

Then you're not paying attention. If the democratic party doesn't get back to our roots and remember who we are we might as well forget about it.

This issue, this thread, may be the single most important thread I've seen on DU since the election. We have GOT to face the issues brought up in this thread. We have GOT to be more than a party that revolves around George Bush. There are people in our party that feel alienated, disenfranchised, used, exploited. It MUST be addressed. And it WILL be addressed, with or without the democrats. Hopefully the Dems won't be so blinded by a false belief that there is no longer race specific issues that need to be addressed that we watch a group of loyal, but disappointed dems throw their hands up and walk away to do it alone, without the rest of the party.

[Misunderestimator]

77. Ditto...

:loveya: for that post.

[ultraist]

82. A toast to equal rights! We are DEMOCRATS!

:toast:

:kick:

[Syrinx]

153. you like Farrakhan do you?

Do you approve of him calling Jews "bloodsucking leeches?" Where's the tolerance and love now?

The very idea of "reverse racism" is ridiculous. There's nothing "reverse" about it. If it was "reverse racism" that would mean he loves people of the other races.

I'll admit David Duke is a racist. Will you admit that Farrakhan is a one?

[Tomee450]

160. If you are trying to

be clever, you are failing miserably. We are not discussing Farrakhan or David Duke. The discussion is about the Democratic Party and its relationship with a loyal constituency, the African American community. Please stop trying to change the subject.

[ultraist]

165. David Duke is one of yours? Is that what you are implying? Sure sounds it

And no, I do not consider Farakhan to be ANYTHING like David Duke, not even close.

David Duke RECENTLY helped to organize a KKK event. The KKK actively seek to destroy and kill Blacks, Jews, Muslims, Gays, and any other nonWhite "Christian."

Your diversion tactics are so transparent.

[southlandshari]

193. Amen. Amen. Amen.

N/T needed here.

[journalist3072]

80. I left the Democratic Party, and became an Independent...

Because I'm an African-American woman, and I am tired of the Democratic Party taking my vote for granted.

I switched to independent the week that Congress certified the results of the 2004 election. I was beyond disappointed that only ONE Senator signed on to Rep. Tubbs-Jones objection to the certification of the Ohio electors.

I felt like Democratic Senators should have been falling all over themselves to do the right thing: sign on to the objection. During the forced Congressional debate on Ohio, I saw so many Democratic Senators get up and say they felt like legitimate Ohio voters were prevented from voting, BUT they still felt like Bush got more votes.

And I wanted to sream, WHAT?! If you believe legitimate voters were kept from voting, that is voter suppresion, and if you feel voter suppression has occured, how can you certify the results?

So I say all that to say that yes, I do believe there is a place for African-Americans such as myself in the progressive party.

[angee_is_mad]

89. That is an option

most definitely!

[journalist3072]

94. Yeppers it is! eom

[bigtree]

81. I don't know whether it is an important worry about 'blacks' in the

'progressive' movement. It's not like the progressives have been so successful in anything lately. We have two major parties with radically different agendas and focus. What seems to happen at election time is that there are some issues that are highlighted and hawked and others are left in the bottom of the box. What's been the fashion of the Democratic party lately is being satisfied with this notion that just identifying ourselves as Democrats means that we already have the issues and concerns that most directly affect most black Americans at heart and in mind, and that we need to 'reach out' to the 'center' (ie. conservatives) in order to attract them into voting with us.

This may be an effect of the reality of the majority in power, but I think it is a false and defeating attitude that alienates blacks and other disaffected minorities from supporting our candidates and Democrats in general. When we give short shrift to issues like urban investment, when we disregard issues like racial profiling, when we discount the concerns of blacks that racism is still a major stumbling block to opportunity, investment, and advancement, we marginalize a huge voting block that I feel could more than provide the margin of victory in elections, given the numbers of those individuals who don't participate in the process at all.

In that regard, I feel our party has become less and less interesting to blacks , except as the only refuge in this two-party menagerie that emerges every election. I still don't feel that there is anywhere else for blacks to go to effectively effect the changes they seek, outside of the Democratic party, given that republicans will never come close to representing or addressing the needs and concerns that most directly affect our community.

But I do feel that the 'progressive' agenda too readily supposes that they have blacks in their pocket just because the other party is more extreme. African Americans have a real need for candidates and movements to reach out and demonstrate that they will actively and aggressively carry their concerns all the way to the Capitol floor and not be swayed by these calls for moderation just to get the ham handed support of some conservatives who may hold the balance of power at the time.

I short, I feel that we need to be moving to a more traditional liberal agenda that will provide a clear difference with the other party that more blacks and others can identify with and get behind and force these 'progressives to recognize that the majority of Americans, black or white, or whatever, have a real hunger for candidates and movements that speak directly to the working poor, and the disaffected in our communities. I personally don't feel that the progressive movement, in its moderation, can excite these folks into action and support.

[MsTryska]

83. Personally -

i think this question is irrelevant to Progressive beliefs.

content of character v. color of skin and all that.....

[SmokingJacket]

90. If not, we are up shit creek.

The biggest challenge dems have now is sticking together.

If we lose any part of our party -- blacks, gays, moderates, etc. -- it's going to make it almost impossible to ever win.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[Misunderestimator]

95. Welcome to DU... You'll enjoy the "Whiteous Indignation" threads here...

maybe chat rooms aren't the place to expand your mind... I think you would find it different here where there is a very diverse community. What kind of place were you frequenting that would say things like that?



If indeed anything of the sort actually happened.

...

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

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

[Misunderestimator]

99. Nothing's impossible... You have a special advantage being married to...

a black woman to understand how important it is to maintain and build up our programs that support and elevate minorities...

Certainly seems impossible with the current fascists in power.

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

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

[Misunderestimator]

102. I believe she is a sell-out. And you know that she was not hired to

her position as Secretary of State because she is qualified. I think that it is obvious what promoting her to such a position of power in such an anti-progressive administration is useful for... for them. To pretend that they represent the black community by offering up "one of them" on a pedestal, who then proceeds to do nothing but support the anti-progressive policies of the administration is absolutely insulting and manipulative.

PLEASE... it's impossible to forget for a second that she works for Bush. The only reason any of us know her name is BECAUSE she works for Bush. Give me a break.

If anything... she has done more to HARM the image of African American women than she has done to advance it.

And :wtf: do you mean by "cutting new territory?" Is the new territory just about her being a black woman in such a position of power? Or is it what she has done with that power?

Your true colors are showing.... careful.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

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

[Misunderestimator]

110. Did you happen to catch her in the 9/11 Hearings?

What did you think of that? Was she acting like a role model? Is lying what our kids should learn from their role models? Incompetence? Making excuses for ones failures? please... it's obvious what you're doing.

[Tomee450]

116. African Americans

are usually very happy to see other blacks holding high positions. However, Condi Rice supports an administration that has done things that will not help improve the lives of black people. Thousands of blacks have lost their jobs since Bush came into office. This is an administration that seeks to appoint very right wing judges who are opposed to civil rights, opposed to Affirmative Action. This is an administration that has gone to war resulting in the loss of many lives, many of them minorities. This war is costing billions of dollars, dollars that could be used to fund social programs needed to help the poorest of this society. Even now this administration is seeking to change the Social Security program in a manner that will only prove to be detrimental to African Americans.

Why would blacks be expected to support a person who is part of an administration whose policies are causing great hardship for their community? Most African Americans are not going to support a person simply because he is black. We have learned a great lesson from the Clarence Thomas affair. A lot of black people gave Powell and Rice the benefit of the doubt. They have both disappointed. I rarely hear any black person express support for Ms. Rice.

[Misunderestimator]

128. Glad to see you here.

:hi:

Good post.

[Tomee450]

133. Thank you !

[Tomee450]

121. So far,

the Republicans have appointed only two blacks, Powell and Rice to very high positions. African Americans are quite aware of the kind of blacks being appointed by the Bush administration. They are mostly right wing African Americans, people who will support the right wing agenda, an agenda which most blacks oppose. So, appointing ultra conservative African Americans to high office does not gain points with most blacks because they see the situation for what it is.

[Sapphire Blue]

111. Dr. Condoleeza Rice....

being referred to by her boss, and now the general public, as 'Condi'.... does anyone besides me find that offensive or derogatory?

What does that say for *'s respect for her? I certainly don't hear him call Rumsfeld 'Donny'.

And, pleeeease, I'm not defending or supporting Dr. Rice. I sent flowers to Sen. Boxer.

[Misunderestimator]

114. I agree... of course Bush belittles everyone who works for him.

Being in politics is more than just choosing a job... you ARE a reflection on those you serve... and they are a reflection on you.

That's so cool that you sent flowers... good for you. I wish I had known about it BEFORE it happened. :toast:

[Syrinx]

154. you're joking, right?

It's deragatory to refer to her by her name? Man, that's really racist. :eyes:

[Sapphire Blue]

155. No, I am not joking. Her ‘name’ is Dr. Condoleeza Rice

‘Condi’ is a nickname.

As much as I politically disagree with Dr. Rice, I believe it is both appropriate & respectful to publicly address her ‘Secretary Rice’ or ‘Dr. Rice’, not ‘Condi’.

My position would be the same if former Secretary Albright was publicly addressed as ‘Maddie’, or Sen. Boxer was publicly addressed as ‘Barbie’.

Regarding your ‘racism’ charge, I’m not going to take your bait.

[H2O Man]

158. I think that to be fair,

we have to put this in a context of George W. Bush's having informal and far too frequently disrespectful "nicknames" for those close to him. It shows a side of his personality structure that I find offensive. And so while I agree 100% with your assessment of the "Condi" business, it is not her alone that he does this with.

Still, I can say that two people that I know very well have had dealings with Bush, while he was governor. The first is a woman I've known almost 40 years. She would rank high among the type of person I think makes a great role model for all women, not just black women. She rarely identifies someone as "racist." It's just not her style. So when she has said Bush is a racist, though he is not aware of it, I know that it means something.

The second person is a man I've known more than 30 years. He is a world figure, friends with Mandela, etc. And he says that Bush is not just a racist, but a mean-spirited and petty man.

In the late 1950s and early '60's, if we were to discuss Rice and Powell, but ignoring that 30%-plus of young black men who are "tagged" in one way or another by the criminal justice system, there is a strong likelihood we would hear the word "tokenism." Yet I think that we can see a strong black leadership that is in no way "token," at all levels of political and social power today. It offers the United States -- and all citizens thereof -- our best opportunity for being able to sit at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood with the rest of the world.

And I would take it a step farther .... there are people of many other ethnic backgrounds, including Native American, Hispanic, and Asian-American, that offer limitless possibilities for leadership in today's world. We can not afford to limit our vision to black & white.

[Sapphire Blue]

162. Dr. Rice

I wholeheartedly agree with your comments, with one clarification on my part. Dr. Rice is not the only target of Bush's 'insensitivity' (to put it mildly); however, as Secretary of State, she is, in my opinion, the most prominent target. For this reason and because she was mentioned several times in this thread, I voiced my irritation at the manner in which she is addressed.

Bush's racism is but one of his many disgusting attributes.


<please check your pm>

[Syrinx]

180. oh geez

I can think of a lot of things to criticize Bush for, but this is certainly not one of them.

Didn't Clinton often refer to his national security advisor, Samuel Berger, as "Sandy?" "Sandy" was no crime, and neither is "Condi."

I wish people would get so upset about things that actually have consequence.

[scarletlib]

103. The African-American citizens of this country have long

embraced progressive ideas for this country. Ever heard of Civil Rights?

Black folk have been fighting for hundreds of years for progressive ideas. The Congressional Black Caucus represent the authentic democratic principals as far as I am concerned.

So, I think the party will not be progressive if blacks aren't included.

Finally, maybe us white people are like spoiled children who have hogged all the cake, presents and toys at the party for far too long. Maybe we are the ones who need to get pushed out of the tent.

If it weren't for our Black Brothers and Sisters this country would be a far meaner, and poorer nation than it already is.

[Hippo_Tron]

117. Well the Progressive movement wouldn't exist without blacks

And neither would the Democratic party for that matter. I say, come on board.

[XemaSab]

131. Questions:

How can the Democrats court Blacks and other people of color without being patronizing?

What would you like to see the party do differently? What issues are most important to people of color that are not also very important to poor white people? And again, how can the party address these issues without veering dangerously close to paternalism or sheer pandering for a vote?

[Tomee450]

137. Do you think

vigorously fighting to end draconian drug laws that result in a disproportionate number of blacks being imprisoned is patronizing? What about seeking to end the disenfranchisement of black voters? What are the Democrats doing about that? There are things the Democrats, when in power could have done, but did not. Most leading Democrats don't even bother to discuss issues very important to African Americans. When was the last time a prominent democrat, other than a member of the black caucus or an activist talk about the high black infant mortality rate? When do they ever discuss the poor housing in some inner cities. The No Child Left Behind Program is a disaster. Are the Democrats trying to change that? Increasingly, blacks are looking around and wondering what they are getting for such loyalty to one party.

During the last election, I convinced people to vote for Democrats. Some of them weren't eager to do so. If the Democrats don't start listening to its base, the next time we may find fewer blacks voting.

[XemaSab]

145. Thanks for the response

You're right, the democrats haven't been addressing these issues.

[ultraist]

147. Well said!

Considering the Democrats are doing little to nothing at this point to promote equality or address Black issues, we certainly aren't at risk of "paternalism." I've heard Repukes throw that argument around in their "personal responsibility" discussions. What a joke.

Kerry NEVER ONCE mentioned racism on the campaign trail except his speech on the anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Edu. That is pathetic.

I'm with the Black leaders and Dean on this, we need to return to our core traditional Democrat values. This move to the center has been very damaging.

There are many forms of institutionalized discrimination that have been ignored, as you mentioned, the draconian drug laws are one such example. Revising such laws is hardly paternalistic.

Creating more programs that help to level the playing field, such as adequately funding schools & grants and scholarships for college are not "paternalistic" they are empowering.

Other programs that could be created and enhanced include: minority homeowner loan programs, health insurance programs, sex and drug education programs. There are a myriad of things that could be done, and they are not being done.

Racism has many ugly faces. There is still blatant and overt racism, such as hate crimes and there are insideous forms. None of which are being adequately addressed.

[Tomee450]

149. I couldn't agree more

with your post. I hope party leaders begin to discuss the issues you have mentioned. If they fail to do so the democrats will likely continue to be in the minority as fewer African Americans and others vote for them.

[durutti]

139. Blacks should lead!

Any successful progressive movement needs to be based in working class communities. Those communities are disproportionately black, and so the leadership of the progressive movement should be as well.

[pauliedee]

173. Repug redistricting squeezes black vote into fewer districts

Repugs heavy handed redistricting has squeezed the black vote into fewer districts, leaving fewer congressional seats for inner city politicians. They love to suppress and encourage poverty. :puke:

[tsuki]

140. angee, I don't know what to tell you. I thought, in the 60's, that it

would be different by now. But it's not. The face has changed. It is harder to recognize.

I was raised in the military after Truman declared there was only one US Armed Forces. It worked.

In the 60's, I could not understand dead children in Birmingham, or the assinations of Evers and King and the freedom riders. But there was a face there that you could see and battle. The lines were drawn, and we could fight and win.

Now, the lines are blurred. The face is benign. You think it's a friend only to find out that it is a game to them.

I don't know what to tell you. There had better be a place in the Progressive movement for all of us or we are toast.

[ProgressiveConn]

159. Real question is will the black community accept progressive values

such as equality for homosexuals?

[ultraist]

164. I call TOTAL BULLSHIT on that

Blacks have historically voted for Democratic progressive values. OF COURSE, they are more concerned about the LIFE SPAN, health care, education, income, and incarceration rates of their people than they are Gay marriage, but they have NEVER lobbied to OPPRESS any group of people including Gays.

Nor have they ever voted in block against their own interests, EVER. UNLIKE, the poor white trailer trash Bush voters.

Just as Gay activists lobby for their main interests, so do Blacks. As they should.

[WLKjr]

176. I second that

wish people would quit throwing out POS comments like that attracting flames......one liner red herrings. I have noticed quite a few flame bait posting around lately. Not that I am bashing anyones posts, but sometimes you would think that some of the questions have common sense answers.

[ProgressiveConn]

181. When asked "Should homosexuality be accepted by society?"

47% of whites said that it should.
45% of whites said that it should not be.
42% of blacks said that it should.
50% of blacks said that it should not be.

So a slim majority of whites polled say that it should be accepted. A more solid majority of blacks say that it should not be accepted.

http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?ReportID=187

I am however not basing it on that information however. I am basing it on personal experience working in an inner city school and in a wealthy suburban school and noticing a significant difference in the acceptance levels. So you could very well make this an economic not ethnic argument which would give the above statistics a false read as they do not take the economic situation of the two different ethnic communities into account.

Personally I see the attempt by homosexuals to gain equality as no different than the black attempt at gaining equality. I'm a complete supporter of both.

Conduct yourself a poll asking "Should the fight for gay marriage be compared to the fight for civil rights for blacks?" I bet you get a 8 to 2 No vote.

[ultraist]

182. A TWO YEAR OLD POLL? And they STILL VOTED DEMOCRAT

That two year old poll shows that while a small majority of Blacks don't "feel homosexuality should be accepted by society" THEY STILL VOTED DEMOCRAT IN 2004 BY A HUGE MARGIN! Furthermore, 92% of Blacks DO feel that homosexuality should be accepted.

WHY should they have Gay issues as their #1 priority? It isn't a matter of EITHER/OR.

You are falsely pitting the two issues against one another. Blacks also don't really support abortion as much as LIBERAL whites, but have historically voted for Democrats because they are more concerned about the horrific disparities of their community.

You are basing your claim on a FALSE PREMISE. You are assuming that blacks vote against their own interest. BLACKS DO NOT VOTE AGAINST THEIR OWN INTERESTS 90+% of the time.

And compare it to society as a whole. Blacks are just as much in favor the poll question about homosexuality compared to society at large.

The public remains divided over whether homosexuality should be accepted by society. While 47% say homosexuality is "a way of life that should be accepted by society," nearly as many (45%) believe that it is a way of life that "should be discouraged by society."

Additionally, the question of your outdated poll was bogus and no margin of error was noted.

Show me a CURRENT poll that shows a large majority of Blacks would vote AGAINST THEIR OWN INTERESTS in order to oppose Gay rights. YOU WONT FIND ONE.

That would be the lower income WHITE FUNDIES that vote against their own interests to oppose Gay rights or abortion. YOU ARE MAKING A BASELESS CLAIM ABOUT BLACKS.

I didn't agree 100% EVERY stance Kerry had either, but I voted Democrat. I was opposed to Kerry's stand on Gay marriage AND HIS VOTE FOR THE IRAQ WAR.

[ProgressiveConn]

187. Actually YOU are making a baseless claim.

First I don't believe I ever made any comment about blacks not voting Democratic because they opposed Gay-rights. Please don't attempt to make it out that I did. Although the original post directly links Progressive = Democratic Party I do not.

Let us look at the black members of congress and their votes on DOMA (Source: NBJC). Additions are those in the CBC who abstained (probably a good call politically as they could not have prevented DOMA from passing even if they were against it) Thus it would be improper to fault them for not voting especially when Watt abstained and he is one of the stronger voices for homosexual equality in the black community. So those who abstained are categorized by their stance on FMA even though it is a much weaker way to determine hostility towards homosexuals because it is much stronger legislation (Source: Ontheissues.org).

Against DOMA: Barbara-Rose Collins, John Conyers, Ron Dellums, Julian Dixon, Chaka Fattah, Alcee Hastings, Jesse Jackson Jr., John Lewis, Carrie Meek, Cynthia McKinney, Juanita Millender-McDonald, Donald Payne, Charlie Rangel, Robert Scott, Louis Stokes, Edolphus Towns and Maxine Waters & Carol Moseley-Braun.
Additional CBC members supportive of Homosexual Equality: Mel Watt, Major Owens, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Elijah Cummings. William Clay voted against banning homosexual adoption and doesn't seem to have voted on either DOMA or FMA.

17 House members and the lone black senator. A solid majority of black congressmen voted progressively.

For DOMA: Sanford Bishop, Corrine Brown, Eva Clayton, James Clyburn, Cardiss Collins, Floyd Flake, Earl Hilliard, William Jefferson, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Bobby Rush, Albert Wynn & the two Black-Republicans Gary Franks and J.C. Watts. Additions: Bennie Thompson, Harold Ford.

11 Black Democrats and the 2 Black Republicans voted for it.

Cleo Fields. I had never heard of Cleo Fields and am unable to find either a vote or a statement from him one way or another on homosexuality.

228 Republicans and 118 Democrats voted for DOMA while 65 Democrats and 1 Republican opposed it. 36% of Democrats opposed DOMA while over 60% of black congressmen opposed it. It is clear that elected federal black representatives are quite progressive on this issue compared to Democrats in general. So it is important to note that I am not saying that Blacks leaders are not progressive. I believe that most of them can clearly see the common link: a fight for equality. However I feel that black leaders are generally more progressive than the black population at large. The fact that progressive voters could care less about the ethnicity of the candidate greatly helps black progressive candidates running for office as Democrats as opposed to more conservative black candidates who may be carrying the black vote in an area but not the progressive vote. This would result in more conservative black Dems not winning a primary that a more progressive black Dem would.

At African American Registry (http://www.aaregistry.com/phpQJr/poll.php?pid=48) they conducted a poll. Is black America Anti-Gay and Why?
- Yes, because African America is more closely aligned with conservative (religious) values. 43 (36%)
- No, because we as a people understand what being discriminated against means and are generally empathetic to any minority. 23 (19%)
- Yes, because (mainly) men in our community bring out an intimidating presence over all gay people. 14 (12%)
- No, because African American’s use common sense and objectivity when judging any human being. 38 (32%)

Now because the last poll was attacked I want to head that off by saying that I know the sample size is small and that at least one of those votes was by a white guy (me who voted for No-blacks use Common Sense and objectivity when judging any human being.) it does show that the black community may be more socially conservative than the CBC etc.

From the article that includes the poll (same source):

"A 2003 poll by the Pew Research Center found that Blacks are slightly less likely than whites to favor opening marriage to gay couples (28 versus 32 percent), or to know a gay friend, co-worker or relative (51 versus 60 percent). Others surveys found Black gays are more likely than white gays to call themselves closeted (31 to 21 percent). Black gays say they're out are less likely than white gays to be open with family (77 to 81 percent) or with work colleagues (44 to 60 percent). At church, though, Black gays are more likely than white gays to be out (21 versus 15 percent of "out" gays)."

This poll tells me two things. First that within the black community there is a stronger general bias against homosexuality than in the white community. And second that the battle over homosexuality in Christianity might very well be further along in the black community than I think and it gives me hope for the future of civil rights.

Personally I think it is silly to take the "Black vote" for granted and I am proven correct that my concern is valid by the posts in this thread. No group of people should ever be taken for granted and personally I feel that unless we get out and fight for the causes that are important to blacks they shouldn't just concede their votes to the Democratic party. We need to continually earn their votes. And as you pointed out we get their votes in a unheard of percentage. Blacks (outside of some native nations) are probably the most loyal voting block for Democrats. And it makes sense. We brought the civil rights acts (and continue to strive for ethnic equality) and as you say we represent their interests economically.

The black community seems to have two main political goals, to further the populist agenda and to further their own civil rights. Both of which are goals within the progressive movement. So I would never expect the black community to leave the Democratic party enmass however I do see the likelihood of losing the unquestioned support from the black community. Republicans are not out to take the black vote. They are out to repress and split the black vote so it becomes unimportant. If they can draw off a small portion of the black vote due to homophobia and keep a larger portion of Democratic voting blacks at home by claiming pro-homosexual interests in our party they will do so. The Republicans know that they can use homosexuality as a wedge issue and although I believe their effort in 04 was MUCH less successful using it as an issue with black voters than with white and Hispanic voters I do see it as a long time threat to black support for the Progressive movement if not the Democratic party.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/886
The link above talks about how it has been harder to gather support amongst black ministers due to Bush's faith based initiatives.

http://www.therevealer.org/archives/main_story_000632.php
The above link talks about the concerted effort of members of the Black-Christian community to oppose homosexual equality.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1345696/posts
The above link is a freeper who claims this very argument is what gave GWB the votes he needed in Ohio. Maybe he has a valid point.

http://www.blackoklahoma.com/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=217
A short Op-Ed that is worth a read.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/112/112_cover_election.html
A good article whose thesis would be completely against my original post but a good read regardless. Including:

"However, African Americans are especially vulnerable to demoralization from within." (I'm unsure of this statement however I will consider it to be true based purely on the size of the black community compared to the white community. And that we accept the political split amongst whites) So the progressive movement must be at least as forceful in the black community as in white communities.

"In mid-October, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies (JCPES), the venerable Washington-base Black think tank, announced that its 2004 survey of African American opinion showed that 18 percent of respondents “would like to see” Bush win – dramatic “news” that the corporate media snatched up and clutched to their bosoms like the Holy Grail. Breaking down the figures, the JCPES claimed that 29 percent of “secular conservative” Blacks and 36 percent of “Christian conservatives” wanted Bush to win on November 2. Eight percent of “liberal” African Americans and 13 percent of self-identified “moderates” also wished for a Bush victory. “I think Bush's faith-based initiative, combined with the gay marriage issue and also Bush's sort of overtly Southern religious personality has made him more popular among black conservative Christians," JCPES research director David Bositis told the New York Times. "

Now granted the numbers were clearly off as even the link I provided to the quote agrees. However I think it is an important indicator of the importance of stressing our common Democratic values such as public education, ethnic equality, etc. If the Republican party succeeds in their effort to round up support of the 74% of Black-Protestants who consider Homosexuality a sin (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031118-103528-5464r.htm)using it as a wedge issue we are going to be put at a SIGNIFICANT AND PERMANENT disadvantage electorally.

Now before you say that I am promoting just one side of the argument let me say that I completely agree with you. There are those within the black political community that are quite vocal about homosexual rights and that it is merely a continuation of the civil rights movement. The National Black Justice Coalition and Operation Rebirth spring to mind.

If we fail to notice the wedge of homosexuality that is being driven into the black community we do so at our own detriment.

"For us to bury our heads in the sand and say these issues (Homosexual Equality: my edit) aren't to be discussed, that's just unrealistic. We need to be talking about them in our own terms and not allowing (Republicans: Kos' edit) to define themselves as the moral arbiters of what's right and wrong." - Mel Watt (One of my favorite MoCs =).

Anyhow to sum up this rambling post I see my first post in this thread as no different than the original post I replied to. If creating discussion on the fact that the Democratic party has not done enough for the Black community and as a result the black community may not support the Progressive Movement & Democratic Party enmass for much longer is a valid arguement than I see no reason why the arguement that blacks who do depart for presumably greener pastures, voting GOP or not voting/voting 3rd Party (which IMO is a vote for the GOP anyway) do so because of their socially conservative values that are in direct opposition to the progressive movement.

Just want to directly reply to the comments given in reply to my original post:

"they are more concerned about the LIFE SPAN, health care, education, income, and incarceration rates of their people than they are Gay marriage, but they have NEVER lobbied to OPPRESS any group of people including Gays."

Well they shouldn't be more concerned with them than equality for homosexuals. And that blacks like whites lobbied for the continued oppression of homosexuals. However I would argue that the issues you present and the issue of homosexual equality are ALL part of the civil rights movement and that blacks who do not see it this way are selling out on the civil rights movement and thus have little need for the Democratic Party in the long run. That they fight for their rights alone and not for the betterment of all oppressed people.

"wish people would quit throwing out POS comments like that attracting flames......one liner red herrings. I have noticed quite a few flame bait posting around lately. Not that I am bashing anyones posts, but sometimes you would think that some of the questions have common sense answers."

I don't mind flames although it surely was not the intent of the post. The point of my original post was to say that the progressive movement has room for them as long as they have room for the progressive movement and that the black voting base is at least as socially conservative as the white voting base and that in the long run it may prove to be a serious problem for both the black movement as it is divided and conquered by the GOP and for the Democratic Party who would lose one of its core voting blocs.

Note: In preview mode there are major formatting issues with this post. I seem to be unable to fix it so I am sorry if the formatting in the final post is messed up. I tried to fix it. =)

[ultraist]

191. Let me try to summarize your points

The Republicans may be successsful siphoning off some Black votes by using Gay rights issues as a wedge and that this is of concern because the Dem party has taken the Black vote for granted.

Is that basically your point, because the first post with the poll stats was not clear, it appeared that you were stating that Blacks should take the lead on Gay rights and put their issues on the back burner. That was my impression which may or may not have been what you were trying to convey. It also appeared that you were pitting Gay Rights and Black Rights against eachother as if there are at odds. Which they are not.

The Repubs may have siphoned some Black votes this past election based on wedge issues. Bush did campaign in Black churches. I don't know how risky this really is, considering, Blacks have historically voted in their best interest and I highly DOUBT the Repukes will offer much of anything to the Black community.

I do agree that Gay rights are civil rights.

[ProgressiveConn]

199. Surely I wasn't pitting them against each other.

They shouldn't be seen as separate causes. Separating them is the goal of the GOP. If they separate the issues they can attempt to split the black community in half as to marginalize it as a political force.

As for blacks putting their issues on the back burner... As a heterosexual white man am I putting my issues on the back burner by supporting black/homosexual/woman's causes? Of course not as the cause of equality doesn't know skin color, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.

We all need to stand together. If we stand apart they win.

[ProgressiveConn]

188. Please read my reply to ultraist. nt

[Deep13]

161. Of course there is.

The Ds have taken a lot of electoral casualties because of civil rights especially school integration and affirmative action. Now, I know that is not all that Black people care about, but I know it is of particular concern. Remember that Nixon won the White House and the Ds. lost the former Confederacy probably forever because of integration. The last two D presidents were committed to civil rights and Johnson was rabid over it.

We are not drifting to the right (except for Lieberman who is hopeless), though I can see why people might think that. Many Ds are willing to make concessions on a few hot-button social issues in order to prevent being shut out of election after election. I have to tell you, the imagined possibility of gay marriage really hurt us among Blacks and Spanish speakers last year. On the things that matter the most, we are all mostly in agreement.

[bling bling]

163. We may all be in agreement, but what are we DOING about it?

I think that's the question being posed to the Democratic leaders by people in the party.

You might be interested in reading the following article. Keep in mind, this was written several months ago. If you read nothing else, read the last paragraph I cut and pasted.

Black Power(less)
The decline of black politics in America
by Norman Kelley

"That Kerry could get away with so little before the NAACP — essentially offering no substantial policy initiatives that would benefit African-Americans — underscores the grim reality that 50 years after Brown v. the Board of Education, effective black politics in America has utterly bottomed out. No real agenda drives politics beyond having the Democratic candidate show up. One is hard-pressed to hear most blacks voice any enthusiasm for Kerry the way they did when Bill Clinton ran in 1992.

“There’s no message, no organizing aimed at black people,” says Kevin Gray, a former organizer in Jesse Jackson’s two presidential campaigns and Senator Tom Harkin’s former Southern coordinator. “It’s not like Kerry stands for anything; black people are voting against Bush” but not for Kerry.

<snip>

The Kerry campaign also promised to send in teams of lawyers and observers to watch for Election Day problems like the funny business that kept thousands of black votes from being counted in Florida four years ago.

“We will enforce the law,” Kerry told the applauding audience. “We’re not only going to make sure every vote counts, we’re going to make sure that every single vote is counted.”

more of this article at link:
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/35/15-kelley.php

[Deep13]

167. Not enough, evidently.

I don't know the answer. People have great hopes for Dean, but he cannot do everything himself.

[southlandshari]

194. Thanks for the link!

I just scanned the article, but it looks excellent. I've downloaded it for more leisurely (and focused) reading.

I've also enjoyed reading your posts on this thread, a thread that raises critically important issues that - like most critically important issues - challenges all people to move outside their comfort zones.

[bling bling]

195. You're welcome.

I've appreciated this thread too. It's a topic I spend a lot of time thinking about, discussing, and studying (you may have guessed that by my numerous posts -- in fact, my husband is making me come to bed now, sometimes he has to drag me away from the DU!)

:hi:

[southlandshari]

197. Mine gave up long ago! =)

He's a morning person, I'm a night owl. Hey - where are you in Missouri? We lived in Springfield our first two years of married life. What an eye-opening time that was. I'd rather reserve comment for a PM!

[bling bling]

198. St. Louis

I'm definitely a night-owl too. Unfortunately, my day-job is rather inconvenient for that. Ah well, will be another long day tomorrow, just like the rest of them. G'night.

[mark414]

169. kick

[chlamor]

174. Is there a place for Progressives...

in the Black Movement. It seems that Blacks are always the ones to asked to "join" or not join some White political movement. Maybe we should turn the question on its head and all consider joining Black struggles or Native American movements. I truly appreciate the sentiment in your post. I'll go now.

Kita-Listen

[Name removed]

175. Deleted message

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

[Tomee450]

177. If Angee is angry

she has a lot of company among African Americans. You need to read the entire thread. You say the Democrats care. Talk is cheap. Black people have specific problems not even being discussed by the leadership of the party. As a black person, I really resent your dismissive attitude. Millions of black people, even though not happy with the Democrats, went to the polls and voted for the party. You seem to think this loyal constituency should not express its concern for what is perceived as the party's lack of interest in solving many of the problems of the black community.

[Trajan]

178. "Democrats" ...

Note the use of the word "Democrats" ... This is a very large group of human beings with contending ideas of what should be done when and how ....

I am a Democrat .... and I care about the cause of blacks in america ... Yet I do not set the party agenda .... BUT I am still a Democrat who cares ....

Be CAREFUL at whom you aim your arrows, lest you slay your own brother ...

THIS much I know: Getting pissed off and NOT participating is a ridiculously assinine 'solution' to angee's 'anger' ...

Can I recommend JOINING the Party at the local level and DEMANDING accountability ? ...

Sorry: but the jaded 'I'm leaving cause I'm pissed' scenario doesnt solve a damned thing ....

There is NO DOUBT that much remains to be done for blacks .... nevertheless, one can safely presume the party that WOULD do something if given the chance would be the Democratic Party .... NOT the GOP ...

Hey: I'm white, I'm poor, and I'm very frustrated by my current path through life ... But I'm not going to take it out on my fellow party members ....

It isnt their damned fault .... THEY are trying ....

[bling bling]

179. That attitude is not only dismissive,

it's abusive. Picture an abusive husband:

1. Verbal chastising i.e. "you're ridiculous" i.e. "don't look at me, you're the one with the problem"
2. "you don't want to leave me, nobody else will love you like I do...."

[ultraist]

183. I agree.

And this comment is derogatory and presumptuous: "Getting pissed off and NOT participating is a ridiculously assinine 'solution' to angee's 'anger' "

Who the FUCK suggested "NOT participating?" The whole discussion is about WHAT SHOULD AND CAN BE DONE and WHAT DIRECTION SHOULD BE TAKEN? NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED DROPPING OUT OF THE POLITICAL DIALOGUE OR BEING APATHETIC.

It's obvious that some people are fearful that they may lose a little bit of their white power because they feel entitled and privileged and wish to keep Blacks in their place. This is YET ANOTHER reason why I think leaders like Farrakhan are important. I hope his next million man march scares the fuck out of those types of whites. Maybe it will be a wake up call to them that Blacks DO have POWER.

They CAN and they WILL use it as THEY ALWAYS HAVE. NOTHING has been handed to Blacks on a silver platter. EVERY INCH OF PROGRESS was a result of their FIGHTING FOR IT and they have shed blood for it. How fucking rude to insinuate they are sitting around "waiting to be courted" or threatening to drop out of working for progress. Some NEED TO READ THEIR HISTORY BOOKS.

[bling bling]

184. It's kind of like

when Dems look around at the state of our government and our country and attempt to open a dialog about the problems that can, should, and need to be fixed -- only to have a flag shoved in our faces and an off-handed comment about moving to France.

Why would Dems want to shut down conversation from people on our side in our own party? What helps some helps us all. We are only as strong as our weakest link etc. etc. etc.

These issues are real, and I agree with the OP that if they aren't dealt with through action soon many people will walk away. I don't like talking to a brick wall, either. For the most part I see the majority tend to agree. But there's also been a lot of eye-opening comments related to this topic that only bolster my belief about how necessary this discussion has been and will continue to be.

[Trajan]

185. Laughs ....

Yeah .... Poor Trajan, living in a trailer park in the middle of the Ozarks, working an EXTREMELY low wage job to try and provide for my kids and wife ....

Yeah: I'm looking to 'keep blacks in their place' .... I have that power ? ....

Get a fucking GRIP !...

First: the tenor of the thread WAS to move away from the progressive cause if certain aspects of a specific 'black' agenda were not placed foremost on the liberal 'to-do' list ....

No: I dont make a distinction between poor blacks who need help and poor hispanics who need help and poor and poor whites who need help ...

There is a LOT of need out here right now ... NOT just 'black' need ... The "I am jaded because' position is pessimistic and divisive, no matter WHO the speaker .... THAT is what I responded to ...

I am a humanist, and frankly I ignore specific cultural idioms to focus on the greater good of the whole fabric of humanity ... irrespective of race and ethnicity ...

Angee is angry ? .. well good for her ....

Let me tell you: I have been doing all I can to help angee's kids and family get fed, sheltered and clothed ....

I am NOT the cause of angee's anger ...

Who me ? .. powerful oppresive me ? ...

I live in a trailer park .....

[bling bling]

189. I found it.

Here's a thread I started from the day after the election. Keep in mind, the harsh language I used was a result of my anger and bitterness at the time -- you might remember DU even had a special forum for angry/bitter/cathartic posts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1310470#1310670

I don't know how you feel about him, but I would get on board with any group who would be willing to take the lead in advancing candidates like him. In fact, it may just take a large specific voting bloc to take the lead this time to convince the DNC to put forth a candidate we can all feel energized and unite behind. "Energy" is a sorely lacking element of the Democratic party anymore.

Taking the lead and succeeding on something like this would be very empowering for those of us who don't feel empowered lately. The residual effect from staging and being the force behind that kind of power would be highly beneficial to us in the federal, state, and local levels as well.

[alittlelark]

196. I haven't read all the replies, but I consider African- Americans

to be the very HEART of the progressive movement. Here in the Bay Area I certainly see it.