Why is Sharpton race-bating the internet issue?

[poskonig]

This might be bad for the all the reasons computerized voting can be bad, but isn't calling internet voting "racist" a bit over the top?

Sharpton Protests Internet Voting Plan
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=694&e=2&u=/ap/20030912/ap_on_el_pr/internet_voting

"For the first time, the Michigan Democratic Party is planning to allow party members to vote for the party's presidential nominee via the Internet, as well as by attending the Feb. 7 caucus or mailing in a ballot.

Sharpton sent a letter to Dean Thursday, challenging the former Vermont governor to oppose the Internet voting plan. Dean's campaign has focused on building support from Web users.

"Perhaps it is due to the fact you governed a state with virtually no people of color living within its borders that you are unaware that this is a racially biased proposal," Sharpton wrote. Vermont is nearly 98 percent white."

Yup, now even good'ol Al has joined the damn pigpile. All who are left are Moseley-Braun and Graham.

[Cocoa]

1. the race issue is real

if you don't understand what the issue is, think about it some more.

[poskonig]

3. So white people without internet access don't matter?

Unbelievable.

[Cocoa]

4. did he say that?

[poskonig]

6. Sharpton said it was a "racially biased" proposal.

I suppose I'm "racist" for visiting DU online too.

[Cocoa]

13. it IS biased

that is such crap about being racist for being online. Shame on you for posting that dishonest crap.

[Terwilliger]

14. why isn't it?

if you suggest that people...say...buy their food online, well, then the people who dont have a computer dont eat

is that what you're advocating?

OnEdit: ear -> eat

[KFC]

87. So that's why Webvan went bankrupt

Actually Safeway and others are making a go with it with a different business model.

And if I were to suggest that people buy their food online, some would and the others would go to the grocery store. No problem.

[jfxgillis]

8. ????

Because Blacks are statistically more likely to be poor than whites, they are statistically more likely not have access to or familiarity with the net.

That's a bias in the PRECISE meaning of the word (i.e., "net access" does not follow a "normal distribution.")

[LalahLand]

12. It does matter but statistically

more whites in this country have access to the internet, not only in their homes, but in the public resources in their neighborhoods (schools, libraries, etc.). This is NOT the case in the black community. Libraries in low income neighborhoods may have one or two computers that barely work (if they work at all). If a national vote is placed on the internet, statistically speaking, the white voice will be heard ten times louder and the black voice will barely be heard at all.

[TheDonkey]

73. Ignorance

If you think the proportion of whites w/ internet vs whites w/o internet is as grossly skewed as blacks w/ interent vs blaks w.o you are mistaken.

Sharpton is trying to stress the point that many, many more african americans cannot reach the internet as other groups in America. An issue which should be actively confronted rather than twisting into racial argument.

[jfxgillis]

2. Sharpton has a point.

There is a class-based difference in familiarity and regular use of the internet, owning a home computer, etc.

Now the explicitly racial complaint by Sharpton is way over the top, but the fact is, the poorer you are, the less likely you are to be able to vote via the net.

[fla nocount]

9. Sad but true.

I hope nobody here suggests using the libraries' computer. Change is not necessarily a good thing. A ballot should be a physical thing, one that you can see, feel, touch and count.

Vote absentee in 04

[MSchreader]

11. Actually, its class- and race-based

Proportionally speaking, fewer people of color are on the Internet than whites. That is especially true for working people and the poor; a small percentage of poor and "working poor" whites have Internet access, while the presence of people of color from that economic range is virtually non-existent.

I think Sharpton is right to make this an issue. You cannot reach working people by running an Internet-based campaign. And it is not my place to question the language and tone he chooses.

Martin

[jfxgillis]

15. Sure it's your place...

.... that's what this forum is for, isn't it?

Personally, I wish Sharpton had explicitly raised this as a matter of socio-economic class rather than race even though the categories overlap.

[MSchreader]

18. Not really

First of all, I make it a habit to not question someone's integrity on these kind of questions, even if I take issue with their motivations. Second, I have no reason to question his chosen tone or language; quite honestly, compared to some of the language I have heard on this issue before, I find Rev. Sharpton's to be rather reserved.

Martin

[jfxgillis]

23. Oh please.

Accusing someone of "racial bias" is needlessly provocative, especially when there remains a less incindiary method to articulate the same objection.

[MSchreader]

27. You may think so

But look at the effect. Sometimes you have to be a little "needlessly provocative" to get some people to actually pay attention. Would you have been concerned about this if Sharpton had not spoken up? Would this thread have even been created?

It may be "incendiary", but it achieved its goal: we're talking about it.

Martin

[jfxgillis]

29. Pfui .... Sure we're talking about it ...

.... and generating extremely harsh feelings that can do nothing but erode Democratic unity in the General election.

You can GODDAMN WELL BET the Freepers are "talking about it," too, and laughing all the way.

[MSchreader]

31. If this is all it takes to "erode Democratic unity"

Then you're already dead. I've seen harsher words tossed about in Boy Scout meetings.

Martin

[jfxgillis]

33. You're saying

"RACIALLY BIASED" isn't harsh?

What the fuck do you think one Dem calling another would be "harsh" then if that isn't harsh?

[MSchreader]

36. Compared to what some Democratic voters are saying

It's tame. Sharpton, at least, is trying to avoid being personalistic. The voters are not.

Martin

[jfxgillis]

38. Well then, "Some Democratic voters" are self-destructive idiots--

--And Sharpton is doing a disservice to the cause of defeating George W. Bush in 2004.

Anything else you want to discuss?

[MSchreader]

129. Other than the sectarianism and liberal racism of your position

No, not really. Good bye.

Martin

[mbali]

41. Stop demagoguing the issue!

Sharpton DID NOT accuse Dean of being racially biased! You are doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing to Dean.

[jfxgillis]

48. That's a JOKE, right?

Sharpton demagogues an issue which he had EVERY OPPORTUNITY to address in a clear and substantive manner, and all of a sudden people objecting to demagoguery are demagogues?

[mbali]

40. Why is it

that when Dean lashes out at the other candidates, it's just further proof that he's the most honest and forthright Dem, but when others question Dean, they are just giving the Freepers ammunition?

You don't think that they are talking about the negative things that Dean says about his fellow Democrats - and not in a good way?

You guys sound an awful like Bush's supporters. Dean is not infallible, he's not above criticism and he has not earned a free pass from other Democrats.

[jfxgillis]

44. You haven't heard me defending Dean on what you say

is "lashing out" in other instances.

And I agree with Sharpton on the underlying issue here, as my first post(s) in this thread pointed out.

What I object to is Sharpton's incindiary claim that the proposal is "racially biased."

There are intra-party things that hurt the party in the general election irrespective of how they help or hurt any faction inside the party. Dems accusing each other of being "racially biased" is one of those things.

[mbali]

58. It's not wrong to point out that something is racially biased

You do not believe that a plan that makes it significantly easier for affluent whites to vote but does nothing to address the incredible obstacles to minority voting is not "racially biased?"

And, as I pointed out, Sharpton has NOT accused Dean of being racially biased.

But even if he had, why would that be any more harmful to the party than Dean's comment that he is the ONLY white politician talking about race to white people?

Do you think such a comment is any more harmful to the party than some of Dean's other criticisms of the party? Why is it that criticisms of Dean must be kept within the family, while Dean can regularly and publicly complain about other Democrats?

[jfxgillis]

82. I just said--

--I'm not defending any Dean comment.

My objection is to Sharpton accusing other Dems of being "racially biased."

Wanna open another thread on Dwean's comment about being "the only white ..." so I can comment there?

[Cheswick2.0]

90. where were you when Sharpton was paraded all over the media

as a joke candidate? Where were you and all the other democrats and lefties in general?
It is racially biased, what is wrong with saying so? Why do women and minorities have to pretend that there is not a problem with the rich white guy lock on the electoral process?
Yes there is a socio-economic problem, a divide based on money and no money. The fact is that most poor people are African American, Latino and or women. Address that!

Man, if the words "racial bias" freak you out, I have to ask you what protected world you grew up in. Racial bias is a fact, not an invective.

[jfxgillis]

93. "Racial bias is a fact." Yeah.

I said exactly that early in this thread.

It's also an extrememly provocative emotionally-charged accusation.

If you think that the fact that's is a fact is more important than the fact that it's also incindiary, well, I can't prove differently.

But don't come whining to me when the Dem next year suffers the same fate as Dukakis.

[Cheswick2.0]

97. The only whiner I see here is you

!

[jfxgillis]

100. Temper temper ...

[Cheswick2.0]

136. calling you a whiner isn't temper my projectionist friend

!

[Eloriel]

70. Those are bullshit GOP, RACIST talking points

"Let's not talk about race."

"Let's do away with hyphenated-Americans. We're all just Americans."

"Saying someone is racist is just divisive."

"Calling someone racist just SHUTS DOWN DEBATE sure as shootin', stops all discussion and debate quicker than anything you can imagine." (channeling Neal Boortz here)

And those are just a few. (Reread your own posts for others.)

BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT.

When they attempt to stifle discussions of race, you are playing into the hands of avowed racists who do not WANT race discussed because they want to hang onto their cherished racist ways.

When they suggest "doing away with hyphenated-American designations," you are trying to limit the right of people to self-identify. How would any of us feel if we were being chided for identifying according to our specific party affiliation? Or let's make it more personal: our gender, since one's race is about as personal as you get, right after gender.

When they try to diminish discussions about what is racist, who is racist, they are attempting to create an environment in which racism isn't NOTICED and isn't NAMED for what it is. After all, if people can't talk about racism, they have to stop complaining about it and if people stop complaining about it, there'll be no impetus for positive change to rid the world of the scourage of racism.

YOU are playing right into their racist-loving hands. Shame on you.

Eloriel

[jfxgillis]

84. Crapola.

Sharpton's public and highly-charged accusation gives the GOP the perfect fodder they need to make those talking points stick.

He could've made the charge privately (like the mostly-Black Detroit municipal power-structure doesn't have influence on the Michigan Dems?) or he could have made it publicly without the "racially biased" phrase.

Either avenue of action would've been perfectly appropriate. All Sharpton has done with this stunt is throw a stink bomb into the garden party.

[Cheswick2.0]

91. Oh crap, Eloriel is correct

when is it time to talk about race in public? When is it going to be appropriate? Because God knows, as a suburban, white, christian, Ford Tauras driving, middle aged, flower growing, bird feeder watching, elementary teaching woman I wouldn't want to be divisive.

[jfxgillis]

95. Okay. Fine.

Let's just rip the Dems apart and let the Republicans drive an electoral truck down the middle.

Do you REALLY think the Michigan Democratic Party's internet-voting proposal is the most important racial issue we can talk about?

Do you REALLY think the Michigan Democratic party is making this proposal because it's "racially biased"?

Do you REALLY think Democrats oughtta be pissing on each other over how the Democrats are "racially biased" while the GOP and the neo-Confederates in their base SKATE?

How about we "talk about" IMPORTANT racial issues like documented disparities in the criminal justice system instead of grandstanding over some pissant internal party institutional issue?

[Isome]

131. "...made the charge privately ..."

Why?! Is it a problem that isn't fit for public debate? Is it too embarassing to acknowledge there are biases in proposed and enacted legislation or policies? Embarassing to whom?

Get the heck outta' here!

[philosophie_en_rose]

111. Thank you, Eloriel and Cheswick.

Although the tone and the lack of spelling skills indicate a great deal about the original poster, let's just look at the issues.

1) Complaining about racism makes you a racist.

Megadittoes, my friend. But how the hell does one do anything about an issue by completing ignoring it? Is it reasonable to attack anyone who has concerns about any issue? The question is not whether Sharpton is racist for pointing out that there is a problem with internet voting for people without internet access. The issue is what will be done to address the problem.

2) Being against racism tears Democrats apart! We can only be against racism, if Republicans are mean.

If Howard Dean is any sort of leader, he can handle this criticism. In fact, I would think that he would want to address it. One of the remarkable traits of our current slate of candidates (minus one) is that they are not afraid to tackle real issues. The point is not intentions, it's results. No one has to intend to be racist for there to be racist consequences that deserve to be addressed.

3) What about white people?!?!?!?!?!

Well, what about them? Tackling racist policies help anyone in the same position. Fighting racism enhances access for anyone without access. Is it truly better to take the Republican approach to racism?

[Cheswick2.0]

139. you are welcome

and I agree on your answer to "what about the white people".

jeesh, is about all can say to this thread. There are so many angry white guy types around here.

There is a backlash against women and minorities that I fear will undo all of the good done by the civil and womens rights movement.

[mbali]

39. Two points . . .

1) I thought being "provocative" was one of the things Dean supporters love about their candidate. Is he the only one entitled to provoke?

2) Sharpton did not accuse Dean of racial bias. He said that perhaps he didn't understand that the proposal was racially biased.

Dean left himself open on this one. He has been trying to convince people that he's the Democratic maverick on race issues and suggesting that he's more sensitive to the race issue than his opponents ("I'm the only white politician talking about race to white audiences"). If he wants to position himself that way, he'd should be prepared for these kind of questions. Sharpton is simply pointing out that Dean should put his money where his mouth is.

"Here's where he can take a real moral stand to show that he wasn't just using one line at the debate," Sharpton said. "Since he's now posing as the guy who deals with race, this is his responsibility."

[jfxgillis]

43. 1. Um, perhaps you fail to understand

the key distinction between PROVOKING a battle with George W. Bush and PROVOKING a battle inside the Democratic primary?

2. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Mealy-mouthed wording aside, do you guess any headline is going to focus on Sharpton's exact words or his use of the phrase "racially biased" directed at another candidate?

[mbali]

61. I don't think

that Sharpton's words are any more likely to provoke W than Dean's claim that he's the only politician talking about race to white people. W. would LOVE nothing more than to pretend that he's more sensitive on race than the Democrats. And if, as Dean suggests, talking about race to white people is a sign of that sensitivity, W. can claim to be Mr. Civil Rights since he frequently talks about race to white audiences. And, thanks to Dean, he's got some ammunition to claim that none of the white Democrats are doing it.

Al Sharpton saying that a Democratic plan is racially biased is no more helpful to the Republicans than Howard Dean complaining that Democratic Party has lost its principles.

[jfxgillis]

88. No, they won't provoke Bush--

--they will give him and Karl Rove GREAT JOY AND COMFORT because the Dems are slinging the charge "racially biased" at each other instead of the bigots in the Republican base.

How can the Dems infighting with each other over accusations of being "racially biased" NOT help the Republicans?

[Isome]

132. GREAT JOY AND COMFORT

That's the same logic right wingers use when saying dissent from the left gives joy and comfort to our enemies. America's public debate over the validity of invading & occupying Iraq aids & comforts Saddam.

If you disagree with that, then logic dictates you rethink your objection to the public charge of racial bias with the use of internet voting.

[Cheswick2.0]

94. Yeah right, Dean has provoked no battle inside the Democratic Party!

</sarcasm>

[mbali]

98. You don't understand

When Dean does it, he's not provoking a battle, he's just telling it like it is!

It's only when anyone else says anything remotely controversial that Dean hasn't said first that it's divisive.

Get it now?

;-)

[jfxgillis]

102. No. You don't understand

1. Charges of racial bias threaten to dissolve the Dem primaries into self-destructive acrimony more than anything else. People don't forget things like this.

2. AGAIN. You wanna trash Dean for "divisive" comments and have me agree? Then opening up a fucking thread on that subject and we'll talk about it there. THIS thread is about Sharpton's charges of racial bias.

[mbali]

108. Speaking of temper, temper . . .

you're getting a little excited, aren't you?

[jfxgillis]

114. Yeah.

Repetitive arguments piss me off, especially ones that are not germane.

Point: "I think Person A's method of handling Controversy Y is divisive."

Counter-point: "So what? Person B's method of handling controversy Z is divisive."

[Eloriel]

72. mballi

I'm not sure jfxgillis is a Dean supporter (is he??).

But in any case, I'm a Dean supporter and I rather resent being lumped in with the likes of jfxgillis on this issue. Sooo, wouldja mind backing off a bit on the "you Dean supporters" line??

IOW: I agree with you and Sharpton on this issue, and I'm SURE I'm not alone among Dean supporters.

So you can quit bashing Dean via using jfxgillis's wrongheaded ideas, 'kay?

Eloriel

[mbali]

85. kay

:-)

[Bandit]

134. Who was the someone he accused?

I was under the assumption that he accused the system of racial bias not any one person.

[blondeatlast]

19. Good point. I work at a public library that offers public Internet access

and the vast majority of our users are from a lower economic scale. My experience is that race follows the same pattern as our citizenry, but virtually all of our users are rather poor.

[birdman]

113. And wouldn't internet voting allow poor voters of whatever race

to vote at the library, thus cutting down the lines at
traditional polling places ?

And, of course, there ARE members of minority groups
who have internet acccess at home as well as poor whites.

Internet voting will not make voting more convenient for everybody
in that some don't have the 'net at home and some people (of all
classes and races) simply hate computers but it does make voting
more accessible.

That's not a bad thing and for a creep like Sharpton to call
it racist is just absurd.

[blondeatlast]

124. It's a class issue, too, and class and racism are inextricably linked.

I'm no Sharpton supporter, but I think he has a very valid point.

[shugah]

119. and how much more likely are you to be poor

if you are not white?

[Terwilliger]

5. "race-baiting" is your post

Al Sharpton brings up an eminently valid point...not everybody has computers, and that's especially true in the poorer communities.

[Northwind]

7. Does the proposal

In some way prevent people from voting the traditional way?

[poskonig]

10. Nope.

It merely makes voting more convenient for those who want to do it over the net. It is very democratic and not much different from absentee ballot.

[LalahLand]

16. More convenient voting for whites, not blacks/poor

Thats why its racist/classist. Have you noticed that the majority of Americans don't vote? If we had the option to vote it would be a great thing but only middle class or richer voices would be heard. Yes, more people would vote if it was online, but the online voices would not reflect ALL of America.

[Eloriel]

17. More convenient for some, putting others at disadvantage

That sounds pretty biased to me. I agree with Al.

But even if I didn't, internet voting is even less safe and secure than BlackBoxVoting -- and believe me, you do NOT want internet voting.

Edited to add: Please get it out of your head that pointing out legitimate racism and racist practices is "race-baiting." You also might consider the fact that those who are traditiona, life-long victims of racism are the very ones who are in the better position to define it and call it what it is than the rest of us. In all my 55 years I have seen VERY little actual "race-baiting" by blacks and other minorities, but I've seen a lot of the use of that term to try to dismiss or discredit valid charges of actual racism, which is precisely the case here, whether you understand it or not.

An awful lot of racism exists that flies beneath the radar for those of us who enjoy the automatic privilege of being white, which means it takes a little thought and consideration to "get it" about many inherently racist thoughts, attitudes, practices.

Eloriel

[Mairead]

22. Internet voting can be made as safe as paper voting

The technology very definitely exists and is readily available. The only part that's not inexpensively available is Tempest-quality pc hardware in people's homes. Without Tempest-quality hardware, someone --like the gummint-- out in the street with the proper equipment can snoop your keyboard and recover your PGP passwords.

But as long as you can keep your PGP passwords secure, Internet voting can be made, using existing open-source technology, quite safe and fully auditable.


That being said, I agree with you that Al is right in calling it racist. Until every family has a pc plus internet access, any internet voting scheme is de-facto racist.

[blondeatlast]

24. Beautifully put! We (whites) don't see the little battles.

Since my husband is of color, he sees racism that just goes right by me, even if I'm there with him. He isn't imagining it, I just don't "get" it.

It can be as simple as a look, or a gesture--when he's explained it to me after the fact, I of course recognize it.

Until you've been there, the little, everyday battles escape you. If I hadn't fallen in love with my husband, I would have been completely clueless. I would have argued that racism didn't exist anymore, even.

You are so right, too, about calling it "race-baiting" just because it's an issue we are uncomfortable with. While I agree the real issue is more about economic status than race, the two walk hand in hand.

I'll give Sharpton the benefit of the doubt on this one.

[mbali]

42. Beautifully said

Thank you!

[TheDonkey]

75. Excellent point! Goes for AA's and Lower income families (nt)

[tjdee]

20. EQUAL access.

It's not very democratic if only SOME people (probably richer, and probably more white people) have convenience. I'm sure everybody would like to sit in their house and cast their vote. It's not fair (plus, as everyone here knows, not very safe or accurate either).

[Cheswick2.0]

96. no internet access, no time to vote after or before work due to.......

less transportation, kids at daycare etc......
Sorry but it is racially divisive.

[unfrigginreal]

21. I read this...

and at first thought that the Michigan Primary was going to be Internet Voting Only. So, I said to myself surely Dean would support him on that...but then I realized that you can still vote the traditional way, so Sharpton's request doesn't make ANY sense at all. Yes there is discrepency between the number of Blacks with internet access and the number of Whites with internet access, but EVERYONE can still vote the traditional way of going to the caucus.

Of course, we still must do more to eliminate the livelyhood differences between Blacks and Whites, so that all have the same equal opportunity for internet access as well as many other things, but Sharpton could have also requested that the caucus be cancelled altogether due to the discrepency between the number of Blacks and Whites that own automobiles.

[MSchreader]

25. The problem, though,

Is the question of allocation of funds. How much money is going to be diverted from the voting-booth side of the primary to set up the Internet side? Where is it going to come from? What is it going to take away from? Who will be short-changed as a result?

The concern is that the money will be diverted from Detroit and other poor areas to make sure that the out-state folks don't have to even leave their house to vote.

Given that the state already has a billion-dollar deficit, and has been cutting services like crazy (especially in poorer areas), this kind of plan will certainly only exacerbate the tensions between the City and the state -- even if the MDP tries to cover some of the costs themselves.

Martin

[unfrigginreal]

28. Excellent point...I didn't think about the financing.

I'll tell you, with all of the questions regarding BBV, I'm not a big supporter of internet voting anyway...but I think that you've made a sound argument for Sharpton's case. I'll write Dean immediately.

Sharpton should make the same request of all candidates though and not just Dean.

[MSchreader]

30. Agreed

He shouldn't be singling any one candidate out, but calling on all of them to get on board.

Martin

[mbali]

51. Perhaps

But it was Dean who insisted that he's somehow more out front on these issues than the other candidates. So he shouldn't mind being called upon to demonstrate his commitment, regardless of what the other candidates do.

[blondeatlast]

125. Excellent point of concern.

[mbali]

50. Disparate Treatment

You don't find it troubling that, in order to vote, less affluent people have to leave their homes (or jobs), probably arrange transportation, find a physical location, likely stand in line, and go through numerous other inconveniences while those with means simply go online and hit a few buttons? You don't think that this is disparate treatment that will result in the diminution of the low-income/minority vote?

Until the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965, southern states set up numerous obstacles to make it harder for blacks to vote - poll taxes, tests (name every American vice president, how many bubbles in a bar of soap), polls moved at the last moment, etc. Their excuse often was, "We're not preventing anyone from voting - anyone can pass these tests if they study hard enough, anyone can raise the money to pay the poll tax, anyone can find the polls if they try hard enough." That's all true - but it's also true that the process they put into place ensured that the black vote would be diluted.

This proposal, even if well-intentioned, does the same thing. And Sharpton is right to call it out. And if Dean is as keen on the race issues as he claims to be, he will get it and speak out against it.

[birdman]

26. Sharpton plays the race card for a living

Nobody is being prevented from voting by the availability
of internet voting. You can make just as good a case that
the elderly (who are often a good deal less computer literate)
are being discriminated against. Poor whites are just as digitally
deprived as poor blacks.

Add this to Sharptons "mistress" comments last week about Democrats
and you can see where he's going. He intends to blackmail the
party next year for a prime time convention speech (which would cost
thousands of votes) or demand to be considered for VP and if he
doesn't get what he wants he'll call the party "racist" and endorse
Bush. He's been pulling shit like this in NY for years.

[LalahLand]

34. I consider myself a reasonable person...

and I agree with Sharpton 100%. Democrats like you who see absolutely nothing wrong with giving "some" voters the huge advantage of voting on the internet while minority/poor voters have to stand in line sometimes for over 3 hours explains why some minorities are getting fed up with the party. Fix the places where most voters have to go FIRST. Make sure that police/roadblocks/voter lists will be accurate FIRST. Don't divert millions away from ensuring a fair vote for all by giving convenience to a select few.

[tjdee]

54. THAT'S IT, you've got it.

I'm somewhat surprised that a few people don't get what's wrong with the proposal.

And again, as birdman says, this even applies to poorer people,etc.

[Cheswick2.0]

103. ignore Birdman, he only likes Black people who know their place....

wait their turn, appreciate the handouts and do what they are told. God forbid Sharpton speak at the democratic convention to the 92 percent of AA's who vote democrat.... much less those of us who enjoy what he has to say.

Wouldn't want to scare the white people. Lets get a nice light colored conservative AA like Ford to speak instead.

[birdman]

109. Cut the crap, Cheswick, Sharpton's a crook.

This is a guy who accused someone of being a racially
motivated rapist when he knew the charges were false.
He would have let an innocent person go to prison branded
as a racist child molestor.

His anti-Semitic rhetoric helped cause a situation where
an innocent Talmud scholar was brutally murdered by a mob.

And for someone who considers themselves a loyal Democrat how
can you speak so positively about someone who once sold their
endorsement to fucking Al D'Amato. George Pataki your kind of guy?
Rev. Al endorsed him, too.

Let Charlie Rangel speak, or John Lewis or Barbara Lee or
John Conyers but Sharpton is an embarrasment to the party
no matter how many one liners he gets off during a debate.

[Cheswick2.0]

137. you cut the crap

your posts about Sharpton put you dead center in the angry white guy category.

[birdman]

140. Did I say anything that isn't true ?

Progressives can't support creeps like Sharpton
just because he pretends to be one of us.

The Tawana Brawley incident alone should be enough
enough to convince us that this guy is not someone
the party should be cozying up to.

[Pocho]

32. "RACE BAITING" =

Statements by blacks which bring to the surface information that neither phony white liberals nor their so called conservative brethren wish to hear or acknowledge. Talk about the "damn pig pile" to which you would cast those who understand things from a perspective that what I assume is a privileged white life will not allow. Lead me to it, for there, I might find comfort among and choose a candidate from that pile of those who see it and say it as it is.

[Cocoa]

64. well said Pocho

Sharpton is doing the party and the country a lot of good by being there, and kudos to the party for not impeding him.

Braun is doing the same for both black and women's issues. I once felt her presence in the debates detracted from them, but after seeing the last one I realized she's bringing up real issues that simply would not have been addressed if she weren't there.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

35. Internet Voting IS Racist, and Classist

We Democrats should be against those things.

And Sharpton isn't "race baiting," he's raising a relevant issue of keen interest to his -- and the Democrats' -- most faithful constituency.

DTH

[poskonig]

37. Guys, it is your CIVIC DUTY to vote.

If you are not voting, you are a sorry excuse as a citizen.

If more white people than blacks, for instance, used absentee ballot in proportion to their population, would that make it racist? I don't see how it can be, since people ought to be voting already.

Analogously, if more whites than blacks turned out for an election proportional to their population, this does not invalidate the idea of DEMOCRACY ITSELF.

I thought Democrats supported "counting **all** of the votes." Perhaps I am in error?

[tjdee]

45. If more white turn out because it is easier to for white people to vote,

that is not fair.

Everyone can mail in for an absentee ballot.

Everyone can NOT use the internet for voting.

As birdman said, you can even expand this to elderly people, poor people, etc.

Dean supporters at DU have expressed a concern over the 'digital divide', so why wouldn't this be an issue with regard to voting?

Though, I feel that Sharpton is using this issue to specifically call Dean out, which is FAR more fascinating than the benefits or disadvantages of internet voting. He's asking him to put his mouth where his...er...mouth... is.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

49. Dean Stands the Most to Gain

Due to the nature of his supporters. The "Internet revolution" is clear in the Dean camp, and while I applaud him for it, I think Sharpton has a relevant concern here.

I would prefer that ALL of the candidates come out against Internet voting, personally.

DTH

[mbali]

56. Howard Dean hasn't gotten around to you yet, has he?

The issue is not the number of people voting, the issue is whether it is appropriate for the party to make it considerably easier for certain people to vote than others.

Perhaps you don't understand, but it is often extremely difficult for minorities and low-income persons to vote and to have their votes counted when they do. Their neighborhoods invariably have the oldest, shoddiest equipment, the fewest poll workers. It is difficult to get transportation to the polls. They more often work at jobs that do not enable to them to vote during voting hours without losing pay. Under these circumstances, it is foolhearty - and, indeed, grossly inequitable - to spend scarce funds on making it even easier for affluent white folks to vote - who don't seem to be having much trouble now - by computer without devoting any resources to upgrades that will make it easier for minorities and the poor to vote.

I have no doubt that, if it suddenly became far more difficult for comfortable white folks to vote while black folk could vote with nary a bat of the eye, this country would think nothing of coughing up the ducats to equalize the system.

[lcordero]

46. "racial baiting"?????

I've seen people say that they are asking for "special" rights which is untrue. Hell, they don't even have anything that closely resembles EQUAL RIGHTS.

Al is right.

[GBD4]

47. Graham has already spoken out on this issue

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=38230

<<Michigan’s decision to allow internet voting in its primary opens a Pandora’s box of issues surrounding the fundamental idea that every American can vote regardless of color, class, or geographic location.>>

[tjdee]

52. Good for Graham.

I hope they all come out against this.

[unfrigginreal]

55. Good for Graham!

It's obvious that a few in this thread see this as an opportunity to slam Dean...but if they truly believe that the internet voting causes a bias in favor of the well to do than they should ALL be encouraging their candidates to come out against this.

I already have with my candidate...Dean.

[Cheswick2.0]

104. very good Graham

good for him, he is right.

[private_ryan]

53. because race is all Al has

and it's a disgrace.

[Terwilliger]

59. Al is right

make sure everyone has a computer or a good enough school and the suggestion of internet voting wouldn't favor such an upper-income group of whites

Maybe Dean could get to work on discussing Black Box Voting, so the black community doesn't worry about being left behind by the two-party system...AGAIN!

[unfrigginreal]

63. You know, there's a few more in this race besides Dean!

Your principled opinions look less principled when you try to trash only one candidate. I would think that you should send that message to all Democrats in the race.

[mbali]

67. But Dean's the only one talking to white people about race

But it was Dean who told us all that he's the ONLY white politician talking about race to white people. Maybe Sharpton took him at his word and was hoping he would explain to the white people in Michigan why this proposal is unfair.

[unfrigginreal]

69. So, you don't really agree with Sharpton, you just want to slam Dean?

If not, who's your candidate and what is their opinion on this subject?

[AP]

62. Dummies. Race is a large part of what the Democrats have.

If we get a candidate in the primaries who doesn't have the same appeal in the general election because different demoraphics voted in the primary, we're fucked.

[Eloriel]

66. No, your post is a disgrace

Thank God Sharpton's in the race, and brings racial issues to the fore. It's desperately needed because our "good Democrats" have taken their faithful minority base for granted for far too long. Just another way they've become Repug-lite.

*I'm* sick of it -- and outraged -- and I'm white.

Oh, and to the poster upthread: I'd be deighted if Sharpton "blackmailed" the DNC into allowing him a prime time speech slot. Absolutely delighted. Frankly, IMO he should accorded that as a matter of course.

Eloriel

[DoveTurnedHawk]

74. AMEN ELORIEL!

I'm happy to see that we tend to agree on issues of race and gender!

:toast:

DTH

[blondeatlast]

79. If Sharpton doesn't speak at the convention

I'm not watching.

[private_ryan]

83. who cares what you think

n/t

[blondeatlast]

123. Apparently you do.

You responded.

:evilgrin:

[Cheswick2.0]

105. Gee, is there a civil rights issue you aren't on the wrong side of?

Really?

[Lindsay]

57. No question that some people "play the race card"

on every issue.

I have thought in the past that Sharpton at least sometimes did.

But having listened to every debate and campaign speech I could, I recognize that (a) he is coming to understand that many issues are class issues as much as or more than a race issue and (b) sometimes he's right.

I hadn't even thought of the issue of how much of the party's limited resources are tied up in setting up internet voting. (Thanks again, Dubya. You've done SUCH a job.) Thank you, MSchreader, for pointing that out.

I also think Sharpton has earned a right to speak at the convention. He's the most electrifying speaker the party has, as far as I know.

[Terwilliger]

60. Agreed.

Kucinich can light the fire under some liberals, but Sharpton really tells it straight...especially at the debates.

[mbali]

65. Sharpton to the rescue

I'll bet the other Dems were glad to have Sharpton around during the debate the other night - he stepped in like a fed-up older brother and ran the hecklers off the block. He made the rest of them look a little wimpy, but they were probably glad he spoke up.

[unfrigginreal]

68. Where's Dennis' statement on this problem? n/t

[Cheswick2.0]

107. DK isn't claiming to be the only white candidate speaking about race

that's the point. If Dean is the candidate you all think he is (and I do not at this point) he will step up and do the right thing, reconsider his position.

[TheDonkey]

71. Sharpton makes a valid point...

but if Michigan will also allow for paper ballots I don't see the problem? It's just another form of absintee ballots it sounds like to me.

I would be worried about internet hacking and elections though.

[Eloriel]

77. It's not just the internet hacking to be worried about

Esp. since there are those who "say" that that can be overcome (which I personally doubt, but what do *I* know, right?).

We need our voting processes to be as transparent as possible. Right now with computerized voting machines we have an utter lack of transparency (more accurately: complete secrecy) surrounding the code that runs these machines. Certification is a complete joke in that certifiers at state and national level do not do thorough, line-by-line code reviews to help ensure against (1) errors that can affect vote totals and more importantly (b) hidden malicious code DESIGNED to affect vote totals.

We have virtually no control over blackbox voting already, but we would have even less control over internet voting.

Eloriel

[LalahLand]

78. hackers are also disproportionately white...

We need to level the playing field there too before internet voting can be taken seriously :-)

[buddhamama]

76. he has a good point

we know that those living in poverty most likely do not have acess to computers and sadly more blacks and latinos fall under this catergory. more so now with the Bush economy.

that essentially leaves them out of the process.
especially if you consider that the poorer the community the less polling places available and the less direct politican contact they receive and/or are able to travel to attend gatherings.

[Lady President]

80. Clearly, it is racially biased

When you make voting more convenient for one segment of the population at the expense of the poor/minorities it is a racially biased proposition. The end result will be that wealthier voters will cast their votes whenever they have a spare minute in the day and the poorer voter will have to arrange to get to the polling place. It also will disenfrancise older voters who are less likely to have computers or know how to use them. The bottom line is that the traditional Democratic base of minorities and the elderly are going to vote in lesser numbers than the wealthy. Think of any important policy (Social Security, welfare, health care) and imagine only wealthy people voting on the issue. Scary.

Also, if internet voting becomes popular, there will be less need for voting precincts. Those people with the least access to transportation will have to travel farther.

I'm sure it differs by state, but in Ohio you need a reason to vote absentee. Our reasons: You will be absent from the County on Election Day, you are 62 years of age or older, you are a full-time firefighter, peace officer or provider of emergency medical services, you or a family member will be hospitalized on Election Day, you have a physical illness or personal disability, you cannot vote on Election Day because of a religious belief, you will be in jail for a misdemeanor or awaiting trial, you are an election official or board of elections employee, or you are on active duty in the state with an organized militia. I know people could lie, but saying "anyone can vote absentee" isn't true.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

81. Seems to me you are the one that is race baiting..Sharpton is simply

sticking up for a demographic that counts on him to do so.

[unfrigginreal]

86. I'd agree if he went after every Democratic candidate...

but that wasn't the case. How do you explain that?

[tjdee]

89. Dean's supporters are highly internet savvy.

And, also, Dean prides himself on 'speaking to white people about race'. Being "the only" candidate to do so, if you listen to Dean himself.

I think Sharpton makes both those points, in the article.

As I said above, he's asking Dean to put his money where his mouth is. Or, his...mouth...where his mouth is.

[mbali]

99. Shoe on the other foot test

Can anyone have any doubt that, if it had been Dean instead of Sharpton who raised the issue, using identical language, we would have been hearing about how brave and forthright and progressive Dean is?

I think for some folks, the only problem with Sharpton's statement is that Dean didn't think of it first.

[tjdee]

117. I think so too....

The thing that I've seen in the past few days (from a few people, on a few threads, obviously not the majority) is just that.

There's a bit of a problem getting to the substance or the facts, or the issues on Dean threads anymore, because people have their guard up over which candidate someone supports and assumed intentions.

[unfrigginreal]

101. You either believe in what Sharpton is saying or you don't.

If you think that Sharpton was just trying to make hay...then the issue is moot, right? If you believe in what he is saying, then you should be doing everything in your power to get YOUR candidate to support it.

Don't be a hypocrite on an issue that resonates.

[jfxgillis]

106. How about this?

You believe what Sharpton is saying, but you don't think it's worth shattering the Democrats into acrimonious charges of racial bias over, handing a gift issue to the GOP and obscuring more important issues of race relations in the USA.

Every single pissant issue of party-institutional decisionmaking doesn't have to a public issue, especially when the downside is so obvious and the upside so marginal.

[tjdee]

116. I agree, they all should support him on this issue, IMO.

I'm just saying, that's why he singled Dean out.

Whether that's right or not..depends on what you said.

[jmm]

92. Some info from the census

According to the 2000 census 55.7% of white non-Hispanic households have computers and 46.1% have internet access. When it comes to black households only 32.8% have computers and 23.6% have internet access.

Sharpton did NOT say internet voting was racist. He said it was racially biased and when considering blacks are about half as likely to have internet in their homes I agree.

[uptohere]

110. research the "digital divide" Al has a point

now thats two in a row that I'm with him on (he came down on the base nature of the hip hop culture and its horribly negative effect on the black community right here in Richmond VA last week I think).

I would never have thought that we would agree on that much.

I have been researching the digital divide for a year or so. Its a very real phenomonon and needs attention. I've been partnering with others to see what we can do here about it.

Take a little time and educate yourself. You might be surprized.

[Evanstondem]

112. Al has a point, but...

He is overdoing it as he sometimes does. Unless Dean is behind the Internet voting plan in Michigan, it is not his fault and not his problem.

[uptohere]

115. as he sometimes does, I love that ! he ALWAYS does but

Rev Al doesn't say its Howie's fault he challenged him to take a stand on it.

Why ?

Dean's canadacy is widely acknowledged as being a heavily "plugged in" one. You could say he was the leader in this sort of thing anomg the candidates. If you accept that, then its a little swipe that perhaps that explains some portion of the perceived disconnect to the black community.

Its really brilliant of the Rev. He manages to get the digital divide into the top layer of political buzz, he gets am indirect swipe at an opponent while at the same time giving said opponenet a chance to really score some points with blacks by picking the digital divide banner up. Noone else has so he could have a coup if he wished.

It doesn't really matter if they go through with the internet voting or not (Bev Harris et al may have issues with it but thats another thread). Rev Al took a great shot at something that actually matters to him. Way to go Al !

[EeJay]

121. What?

Do you realize how it sounds when you say "it's not his fault and not his problem?" You can say that no issue related to race and racism is Dean's - or any other candidate's fault. Does that mean it's not their problem?

You may not have meant to sound so callous, but your comment does not speak well for Dean and his supporters. If he wants to be seen as a candidate who is in touch with the African American community, I hope he doesn't take such a hands-off approach to issues of concern to blacks.

[uptohere]

126. it can be a nice positive for him if he wants or a jealous jibe

he can toss it off as another attack or, as I said before, pick up on a legitimate issue directly involving blacks that cannot hurt him and only help.

I have not heard anyone mention the digital divide yet in this campaign other than this Sharpton issue and even at that he didn't refer to it this way. It is apparantly not an issue for this primary season. I think it could be and would be a good one for anyone clever enough to see it.

For those who saw Sharpton's message as an attack, no, its not a fault for Dean. He was selected for reasons I stated in a prior post which to summarize draw upon his front runner status. And if none of the others see it as a problem, then it must not be a problem. You and I know differently but perception is not universal.

If I seem callous, remember I'm talking about campaigning. Its a big ugly business no matter what you think. I've been in it deep, its just that way. Its high stakes and not for the faint of heart.

Like I said before, I'm involved with this myself and I'd love to see him and all the others get on board but I realize that there is a good chance that it won't happen.

Hope I'm wrong there.

[shugah]

118. racially based or not, it will end up being racial

i've been thinking about this topic. generally i am sensitive to race issues, and i've learned alot, and keep learning more. (there are some really great people on DU that have really stretched me and challenged me to think on racism issues.)

at first, after a little thought, i tended to think AS was wrong on this one. i know many people of many different backgrounds, and with the exception of some "older" people, all of them are online. the people i know that are internet savvy cannot be defined by race or socio/economic status. so, i thought--at first--"not true."

but then i started really thinking about--the part where it would be so cool if i could just click the mouse a couple of times, sitting right here at home, drinking coffee, and not have to drive anywhere, not have to talk to anybody, not have to worry about waiting in a line, on a bloody tuesday when i would have to worry about going early or late, or getting time off work...

a-hah! then it hit me. i know it is a simple thing to arrange some time off work to vote when you are a white collar, middle class, professional. i also know that it is not simple when you are a low hourly wage, single mom who needs every single dollar from every hour worked.

while it's true that more people would probably vote if they could do it quickly, and from home, not all segments of our society would be equally affected by the ease of online voting. the people that would not suddenly turn out (or sign on ;-) ) in droves are the people who are too poor, too immersed in the ugly reality of poverty, and people who have not had access to training in all the wonderful technolgy available to our society. that means "the poor." there is no argument that non-white people make up a disproportionate percentage of living below the poverty level in this country. therefore, making it easier for people who already have the advantage in "ease of voting" would not be fair or helpful in any way to those who already have trouble getting to the polls.

so, i don't think that sharpton was wrong on this one. he didn't call anyone a racist--he stated something that is true, and that would not get any attention from people like me, who would love the ease of online voting, if he hadn't stated it strongly enough to make me think about it.

i do disagree with sharpton saying that bit about vermont being 98% white. alot of white people want to see an end to the racial divide in this country. i don't know if it's 98% but it is more than 2%

[ButterflyBlood]

120. yep, riduculous

although there is a point about people who can't afford computers or internet access, this becomes a classist issue, not racist (of course since you can vote the traditional way too it's not that big of an issue.) but what pisses me off most is the comment about Vermont being 98% white, which is the same many Dean bashers have used here, basically saying that that makes him racist or unfit to lead the nation.

[skeptic9]

122. Are you trying to impose your own racial "lens" on other people?

To have a real discussion about race in the Democratic Party, there are many different points of view about race that must be understood and respected.

One way to get more sophisticated about racial attitudes is to consider Mark Williams's 'Ten Lenses' (URL at http://www.thetenlenses.com/nationalresearch/research.jsp ).

Mark Williams is an organizational psychologist who has served as diversity consultant for Harvard Medical School, Corning, Marriott, Chevron, Unisys, and other large corporations. His "10 Lenses Survey" tried to place a sample of Americans of all races into ten categories. Some respondents were classified into more than one category, so the category percentages summed to about 113 percent rather than 100 percent. But his December 2001 results still seem quite valuable for engaging in debates over racial attitudes.

I have not seen any breakdown of results on such attitude surveys by political affiliation, but I suspect that, like you, many Republicans see themselves as part of the second-largest category Williams found--so-called "colorblinds". On this naive view, which is very self-serving for people who live and work in all-white surroundings, people such as A; Sharpton are "despicable" for "injecting race" into policy debates. Definitions of "meritocrats" and "assimilationists" also sound very Republican to me. What do you think?

, Williams says his "survey captured a snapshot of American attitudes about issues ranging from affirmative action to immigration to the importance of preserving traditional American values. Using sophisticated sampling techniques, Gallup determined the breakdown of Americans within each Lens:

• Transcendents (43%) focus on ... people’s universal connection and shared humanity.

• Colorblinds (31%) say they see people as "individuals" and "ignore" race, color, ethnicity and other external cultural factors.

• Multiculturalists (16%) celebrate the diversity of cultures in the United States, and the contributions they make to national character and history.

• Integrationists (9%) support breaking down all barriers between racial groups by merging people of different cultures together in communities and in the workplace.

• Meritocratists (8%) say they believe in the "individualist" credo of America: if you have the abilities and work hard enough, you can compete with anyone to make your dreams come true.

• Assimilationists (7% of survey respondents) want individuals to submerge their individual and cultural identities in favor of nationalistic and patriotic ideals.

Four other categories ("Culturalcentrists, Elitists, Seclusionists, and Victim/Caretakers") each accounted for at most 1 percent of the sample.

Maybe this tidbit of information will help you see why your reaction to Sharpton might seem so excessive and jarring to many DUers, including myself.

[Clark Can WIN]

127. This is why I like Sharpton in the race

The RW does now and always will say that he is in for his own self interest, but that like most of their spewage is flatly innacurate. Sharpton brings so very much to our party, in that he is totally unafraid to bring up issues on the minds of our constituents that many would just rather ignore and whistle away from, black and white.


Al Sharpton has joined a "damn pig pile?" I will just let the bias of that comment stand for itself.

While I agree that more voters in the pool is good, it is obvious that more white people have internet access in the home than minorities. Why is it acceptable to set up internet voting for largely white affluent voters so that they do not have to bother themselves with standing in line at the precinct, but unnaceptable to send volunteers floor to floor {in balanced pairs of course)in housing projects to collect votes? I'm not saying that you are against the latter method of collecting votes, but I do question why you would not take his input into account or suggest that he is "playing a race card" rather than fight with him to expand our democratic base.

[JI7]

128. agree

i enjoy listening to different views.

[theboss]

130. That's all he has

All Sharpton can do is race-bait. It's his only pitch.

Just be happy he didn't accuse Dean of raping a black girl and covering her in feces.

[Isome]

133. Actually, that's all YOU have.

All you and other narrow-minded people like you have is calling Al Sharpton a "race baitor".

[theboss]

135. Sharpton has made a career of dividing people

I don't know what core values he has other than getting media exposure and favors from political candidates. He's sold out the Democrats time and time and time again. He's partly to blame for the fact that there is Republican governor of New York and a Republican mayor of New York City. He helped keep a Republican as Senator.

He's publicly libeled innocent people. He's made efforts to divide blacks and Jews in the one place in the world where they live together in large numbers. You can make a case that he has insitgated violence on more than one occasion.

By the way, the proper response is "I know you are, but what am I."

[Isome]

138. You don't know, because you can't hear...

or more likely refuse to listen. Are you of the mistaken belief that your opinion is the only one (the correct one) that matters? You must be, and that is unfortunate for the party as a whole. You've obviously not read the many responses to this topic that make clear the validity of the charge. Of course, that has to be because your narrow-mindedness precludes you from seeing anything that contradicts your erroneous conclusions.

While you inhabit a reality in which Al Sharpton is the cause of the party's problems, many of us realize that without Al (and others) sticking with the party and forcing these issues to the fore, there'd be an exodus, either a slow trickle or en masse to more comforting climes -- delirious apathy or a third party.

I forgot to add: Given the redundancy of your reply, I gave the proper response -- calling Al a race baiter is all you have.

[theboss]

141. My problem with Sharpton has to do with Sharpton himself

I find him a vile man who hurts people to gain power (and presumably money since the two go hand in hand). There may be something to the fact that Internet voting is inherently racist; though I don't see it as anymore "racist" than being able to buy airline tickets online.

My problem is that Sharpton will grab any issue to divide people - especially people who should be working together. Most people would see this issue as a way to try to get black people online - if they aren't - and involved in the political activism of the Web. Sharpton sees it as an opportunity to call Dean a racist.

Same thing happened in the NY mayoral race. A "leader" would have seen it as a chance to get the needs of the city's minorities on the City Hall agenda. Sharpton saw it as a chance to settle political scores.

Same thing happens with white entrepeneurs in black neighborhoods. A leader would sieze the issue to encouraging both minority hiring and minority entrepeneurship as well as community activism. Sharpton uses it as a chance to demagogue and create a climate that ulitmately leads to a man's death.

[Isome]

142. In reality...

It's the overwrought reactions and invective like yours that divide people. That you have yet to acknowledge the numerous posts in this thread that say Dean was not called a racist, but grudgingly admit that there is bias in internet voting, is indicative of your determination to ignore information that runs counter to the beliefs that make you most comfortable.

IMO, undoubtedly it is your comfort that most concerns you, as it is with too many non-blacks when confronted with issues that affect black or brown people in stark and unapologetic language. Possibly you expect a bowed head and bent posture, because being met eye-to-eye, and being spoken to with certainty, somehow threatens your comfort zone. As long as Al has been around, you should start to get used to it.