pull!

[chordam7]

i'm up too late again, but not ridiculously so. and i'm going to bed in a moment so that's all good. however, i made the mistake of catching up on some news and now i have to vent. i rarely do this, so -- let's get mean

Comments

[nihil_duce]

2) i was born in this country and was aware of the world around me when blacks were not infrequently beaten to death for trying to vote. obama winning 27% in west virginia is NOT a clinton landslide. it is a fucking miracle. to be perfectly blunt, i would have been satisfied with getting obama out of west virginia in one piece!

Very

well

said.

[chordam7]

THANKS!

[peregrin8]

let's just drop the fancy language because part of the story here is how well a black man can do when there is still pervasive racism in this nation.

yes!

Yours is an excellent analysis; I wish I saw more like it in the press.

[chordam7]

exactly. the funny thing is how great this story is -- that the grand old man is still a bit of a maverick and a 'nam vet and p.o.w. -- the machine hack power broker is a woman. the young turk is mixed race/black identified...?

that's america!

[ms_vermilion]

3) the word your looking for is "racists." while i generally appreciate the ny times attempt to lift everything to the level of the genteel, well, just read the quote, "Two in 10 white West Virginia voters said that race was an important factor in their vote, and more than 8 in 10 of them backed Mrs. Clinton, according to surveys of voters leaving the polls."

Thank you for articulating this so well. One of the more insidious ways that racism is perpetuated in this country is through assertions, implicit or explicit, that it is no longer an issue. Obama's success in this campaign is assuredly a statement of progress, but it is not an indicator that racial conflicts are merely historical.

[chordam7]

i had a discussion with younger friends out here and had to do the math to demonstrate that, if you were a young adult/late adolescent during the height of the civil rights movement, you are not only probably still alive, but may still be active in society and the work force -- where you have gained a lot of seniority (and at least some influence).

the trouble was civil rights is that MLK was such a seminal figure that his history and the movement's are entertwined in people's minds.

a lot of times, i think of the modern civil rights era stemming from around the time thurgood marshall prepared to argue plessy vs. ferguson in front of the supreme court for the naacp -- more of a 70-year arc. if you like to look at w.e.b. dubois or george washington carver founding tuskeegee, you can take the modern era back 100-years or more.

...we still have some ways to go before we rest.

[ms_vermilion]

To expand that even further I think it is really important for people to recognize that 1863 was really not very long ago. There is no possible way that race relations in this country would be all rosy and color-blind, such a short time after the end of slavery.

yep!

[chordam7]

i often think that. looking at what this country has achieved in -- let's say 150 years -- in terms of race, class, gender, national origin, sexual orientation and identification, etc., it's pretty remarkable.

looking at what we have left to do, on the other hand, is pretty daunting.

i think that, if we could speak more openly, with less fear, hate and career agendas, we could empathize with people buffeted by change and the people suffocated by the stagnation -- and keep moving forward, with less animosity.

of course, this posits common sense, which isn't all that common at all....

; )

[snakewater]

I absolutely agree with you. I kept thinking that while everyone was going on about "working-class" what they really meant had nothing to do with labor or income, but everything to do with race.

And by the way, what the fuck is up with giving Obama shit over calling someone "sweetie" anyhow? Shit, Bush says worse than that a hundred times a day. Not to mention, Obama apologized before the story had broke, so again, what the fuck? Can't the media focus on something that matters...oh, for example, the utter destruction and chaos in Myanmar? The Chinese earthquake? Or is calling someone "sweetie" simply more important to Americans than thousands of dead Asians?

[darkphilodox]

The media cant focus on something that matters until most people who read or watch the news really care.

nailed it!

[chordam7]

well said. this is part of why so many people are turning to the internet and streaming audio and video and other indie stuff.

when you do this stuff and don't make a fortune, you did it because you wanted to do it.

it's funny how little i miss doing mainstream journalism since i started running the two blogs and doing my radio show.

i like journalism; i just didn't like the profession much anymore....

[namelesscoward]

1. "to be perfectly blunt, i would have been satisfied with getting obama out of west virginia in one piece!"
I laughed out loud when I read this line.

2. The quote from the survey said 20% of white voters said race was a factor. In another article, I found this quote

"In the Pennsylvania primary, Clinton captured 63 percent of the white vote, while Obama gained 90 percent of the much smaller black vote. In exit polls 18 percent of Democratic voters in the eastern state said race influenced their decision, with 73 percent saying they would back Obama in a general election versus 82 percent for Clinton."

In this poll they didn't segregate black and white voter and the percentage still came out to be roughly the same as West Virginia.

Could it be that, as a nation, roughly 20% of us are racist regardless of our race?

[chordam7]

Could it be that, as a nation, roughly 20% of us are racist regardless of our race?

from what i've seen, that may be just about right.

there's a slogan:

"america! now only 20% bigots!"