why isn't Sharpton calling Kerry's agenda "anti-black"?

[pruner]

Kerry signed the manifesto, "A New Agenda for the New Decade":

Goals for 2010

• Shift the emphasis of affirmative action strategies from group preferences to economic empowerment of all disadvantaged citizens.

Source: The Hyde Park Declaration 00-DLC6 on Aug 1, 2000

http://www.issues2000.org/Domestic/John_Kerry_Civil_Rights.htm

[wtmusic]

1. Because Kerry isn't leading polls

n/t

[La_Serpiente]

2. don't let your hubris get to you

[wtmusic]

5. No hubris involved

Should Kerry move to the front he will have his rightful turn

[jeter]

3. Because Jesse Jackson Jr. didn't endorse him

That was what his outrage was all about.

[HazMat]

4. Because Kerry has a 30+ yr record of fighting for civil rights

where Dean does not. After all, he was governor of one of the whitest states in the union... he's never had to concern himself with such issues.

[SahaleArm]

6. Obviously you didn't get the memo.

Vermont is the most ethnically and economically diverse states in the union or confederacy, depending on where you live:).

[Isome]

9. You're making a funny right?

Vermont is relatively homogenous... about 96.8% caucasian population (2000 census). I'm just punchy, you were being funny... weren't you?

[sandnsea]

7. Ask Al...

But if Kerry is proposing ignoring race in Affirmative Action, he would be wrong. (See how easy that is Deanie's?)

Considering all of Kerry's statements over many, many years, I understand that he is wanting to consider both race and economics in Affirmative Action. This is what they do in Michigan. Minorities, low-income, rural kids, kids whose parents have never gone to college, and some others, are all eligible for Affirmative Action assistance. From what I understand, this is what Kerry supports. Not changing from race to class, which is what Howard Dean said.

[gottaB]

8. John Kerry has recieved 100% score from NAACP

He has an outstanding record on gun control, affirmative action and other issues of concern to the NAACP and African American voters in general.

In the page you linked to, the first item listed was "Reduce discrimination based on race, gender, national background, religion, age, disability, or sexual orientation." It stands to reason that if that goal is accomplished, the next item on the agenda would be to shift the emphasis of affirmative action strategies to economic empowerment. That is not the same argument Howard Dean seems to have made in the past, i.e. that we should go ahead and make that shift now.

If you really want to know why Sharpton called Dean's agenda anti-Black, don't look to Kerry or any other candidate. Look at what Sharpton said, because he stated very clearly why he said that. He named several positions on which Dean stands in opposition to the NAACP and the best interests of Black voters (according to Sharpton, of course). He said he was singling out Dean because of Dean's claim to be the only white candidate talking about race. Sharpton said the same thing when he called Dean on internet voting in Michigan (too which the Dean campaign made no reply, and it wasn't an issue in the white press until much later when other candidates jumped on it.)

For crying out loud, these fellows are competing for the same voters. What do you expect, hugs and kisses? According to some reports Dean is doing *very* well in D.C. You know Sharpton wants a victory there, and how much it means to his campaign. Why do you think he called Dean's agenda anti-Black?

[pruner]

10. as a NYer I know exactly why Sharpton called Dean's agenda anti-black

race-baiting is Al's specialty. he's perfected his craft over many, many years.

[gottaB]

11. Define "race-baiting"

and explain how that's a better explanation than the one I offered, namely that Sharpton and Dean are compteting for Black voters.

Until I know what you mean, I can't make sense out of your reply.

[Isome]

12. I figured that out the other day...

Race baiting is broaching the subject of race when everyone else is trying not to think about it. Or, it's pointing to a problem involving racial discrimination, when those who aren't adversely affected by it have more important things to think about.

It's one of those catchall phrases the GOP coined and easily-swayed Democrats (who already have that bent anyway) latch onto, and then try to browbeat others with it.

[gottaB]

13. thanks for the definition

it wasn't in my dictionary (dict.org)

;-)