2004 Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry reportedly will endorse the Illinois Senator’s candidacy.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
2004 Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry reportedly will endorse the Illinois Senator’s candidacy.
Bad Behavior has blocked 18840 access attempts in the last 7 days.
26 Comments
Quoting a black American hero in endorsing the man who hopes to be the first black president, Kerry told a cheering crowd, “Martin Luther King said the time is always right to do what is right.” Now is the time, Kerry said, to declare “that Barack Obama can be, will be and should be the next president of the United States.”
Myself and millions of other non-Black minority constituency roll our collective eye as yet another lame white-boy politician inanely invokes the name of MLK in the proximity of Obama in order to score some Political Correctness points.
I actually like Obama… so…
Damn it! Where’s the un-endorsement button?!!
Netizen Kim,
What’s the problem with invoking MLK? Are you saying that his words and deeds are to be reserved for use only by black people? That’s just silly.
I thought Kerry’s endorsement of Obama was principled, although I share brendon’s opinion about its value. There has been a lot of very good introspection among American leaders and opinion makers in the past few months about a black president. (see Andrew Sullivan’s writeup) You’ve chosen to debase that.
Irrespective of your own specific minority, your kind of snarkiness and cynicism will ensure that you are always marginalized. Enjoy the fringe.
Don’t worry. Senator Kerry may change his position later….
One major benefit of the endorsement is that Kerry will provide a large e-mail list of small financial contributors from 2004, and lend use of what remains of local networks to help galvanize the voting effort. And organization was one factor in Hillary’s NH success. Richardson, the other ‘experience’ candidate has now pulled out, which could help Hillary in the short term, since Obama must also compete against Edwards, the other ‘change’ candidate. I’m still surprised that some people (mostly women I guess) in NH took offense to Obama’s “you’re likeable enough” comment/joke to Hillary at the debate. If it was said to another man, that kind of mild teasing wouldn’t offend anyone, but I suppose the rules are different in this case.
#5 Campaign finance laws may not allow Kerry to simply hand over his e-mail list to Obama. Generally lists have to be sold or leased at fair market value. They can also be traded, but as Kerry isn’t running for national office, I don’t think that’s an option here. What Kerry could do though is send an e-mail to his own mailing list on Obama’s behalf, with a link that allows people to make contributions to Obama or sign up to be on his list. Obama can then add anyone from Kerry’s list who takes one of these actions, essentially opting-in, to his list without having to pay for the acquisition.
ecorn - ok, but I don’t see what difference that makes in practical terms, if Kerry continues to forward Obama messages on to his list members. I suppose it could matter if Kerry decided to split from Obama in the future.
There has to be a clear delineation that the messages are from Kerry on Obama’s behalf. Simply forwarding along the messages to an e-mail list could be seen as a political contribution.
To be clear, I’m with bumfromkorea - I want an un-endorsement button too!
If America gets its first black president will that mean people will stop playing the race card all the goddamn time? Cuz I’d vote Obama into office just to see that.
#9
Let me get this right? Are you asking that if a black president is elected people will stop mentioning when they see racism? Probably not, I don’t see what the two have to do with each other.
no man, that’s not what I’m saying. “Playing the race card” does not mean people mentioning when they see racism. Playing the race card means people mention their race at every opportunity in order to get as much advantage as they can in any given situation.
For instance, if Barack Obama always mentioned the fact that he was black when he was making campaign speeches in order to appeal to black voters, he’d be playing the race card for political reasons. But he doesn’t. He’s never once mentioned the color of his skin or appealed to a racial demographic. That’s why he’s so cool. Even if he doesn’t win his example alone might get people to stop playing the race card.
Let me add to this description of the “race card.” A nation of fair-minded people that has an element of racism in its past history is bound to feel a degreee of personal responsibility for righting the wrongs of the past, ie. historic guilt. America inherited the racist legacy of Europe, but due to its equalitarian ideal, unlike Europe, it confronted racism squarely and heroically. The degree of this committment is demonstrated by the fact that Americans committed to a civil war, and years of activism, including grass-roots protest, legislation and trial law to bring about an unprecedented degree of progress in achieving a equalitarian society in a multicultural society. As equalitarianism remains a moral imperitive shared by the majority of Americans today, it is easy to wound people by labling them racist. The “race card” means using this in one’s favor by using the epithet “racist” as an unfair insult. With regard to Obama, I see no evidence of the race card being used. However, the simple fact of his race taps into the collective equalitarian spirit of America. Americans by in large root for minorities to achieve success, as this constitutes the American ideal. This makes Obama’s race is a great politial advantage. I myself am leaning toward him, partly for this reason.
Mizar5 said: “Americans by in large root for minorities to achieve success, as this constitutes the American ideal.”
Well, I wish this were prevailing view in America, but there are still plenty of people who will vote against a minority candidate based solely on race. Evidently, it is fairly common for black candidates to poll higher than their actual vote share, a trend seen not only with Obama in NH, but also Mayor Tom Bradley in LA, Wilder in Virginia, and others. Analysts say that some white voters want to appear fair minded to the phone interviewer, but actually harbor doubts about a minority candidate. I really hope this doesn’t hurt Obama’s chances, but you never know what people really think.
As for blaming Europe for slavery in America.. hmmm.. strikes me as a cop out, big time. The Europeans abolished slavery well before the US did. The French abolished slavery under Napolean in 1793, and the British abolished the slave trade in their colonies in 1807.
Correction… France abolished slavery during the Revolution, not under Napolean.
Good thing I wasn’t eating when I read that or I would have choked on my food. And what does “equalitarian” mean anyway? Perhaps you meant “egalitarian.”
“America inherited the racist legacy of Europe, but due to its equalitarian ideal, unlike Europe, it confronted racism squarely and heroically.”
Strange how American blacks found themselves better treated in Paris in the first half of the 20th century than at home. One could argue that, even today, the square and heroic confrontation you speak of remains a work in progress.
“America inherited the racist legacy of Europe”
this strikes me as being similar to blaming Japan for [fill in the blank].
Well, the United States did “inherit” the slave labor tobacco industry set up in the colonial period, but deserve some “credit” for adapting the system - heck, making it their own you could argue - for cotton plantations post-indepedence.
“Strange how American blacks found themselves better treated in Paris in the first half of the 20th century than at home.”
That reminds me of something I found funny a while back. Apparently, Jesse Owens was treated better in NAZI GERMANY than he was in America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.....n_Olympics
“That reminds me of something I found funny a while back. Apparently, Jesse Owens was treated better in NAZI GERMANY than he was in America.”
I had no idea Nazi Germany was such a wonderland for African-Americans. Maybe the Germans were playing to the world press…you think?
“Joseph Goebbels maintained constant pressure on the city’s (Berlin)large Jewish community, forcing them out of business and professional life and placing obstacles in the way of their being able to live normal lives, such as banning them from public transport and city facilities. There was some respite during 1936, while Berlin hosted the Olympic Games, but from 1937 the intensity of his anti-Semitic words and actions began to increase again. “The Jews must get out of Germany, indeed out of Europe altogether,” he wrote in his diary in November 1937.
Of course, let’s try not to be too hard on the Germans…they were only copying King Edward I of England after he abolished all Jews from England in 1290 for more than 300 years. Yep…After he took their property, took their money, made them wear yellow patches on their clothes (Hitler the copycat!), and had killed enough…he finally sent them on their way. France would follow not too far off.
As for Europe’s racial enlightenment, I’m curious why football fans scream, “Monkey!” and throw bananas on the pitch when African players touch the ball.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwpO-nnFY9g
Yes, all of Europe is just like Paris and everybody is treated like a stripping Josephine Baker.
A concise history of black-white relations in America:
http://bp0.blogger.com/_s3qR1I....._color.png
Can you give us a concise history African-American and Korean-American relations? We all know most of you Koreans hold 3rd World people and people of darker skin in such high regard!
Oh, I forgot about Hines Ward! He’s not Korean this year because he didn’t win the Super Bowl.
You associate yourself with MLK only when convenient. The rest of the time…well, again we all know how most of you feel about people with darker skin.
Just look at the way minority kids are treated by the kind and loving people here.
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti.....04736.html
Yeah, the US and other places have racism problems, but Koreans also contribute to those problems. Your people aren’t innocent Nutizen Kim.
There is a reason why China Town wasn’t put to the torch by African-Americans. Most, but not all Koreans think they are racially superior to others, especially people with dark skin.
Can you give us a concise history African-American and Korean-American relations? We all know most of you Koreans hold 3rd World people and people of darker skin in such high regard!
Are you referring to the LA riots of ‘93? White cops beat up a black man and the blacks loot and burn Korean-owned stores. I still have trouble figuring that one out.
Oh, I forgot about Hines Ward! He’s not Korean this year because he didn’t win the Super Bowl.
I freely admit that blacks are far superior to Koreans in football. You guys also dance and sing far better, have more rhythm, and have much bigger dicks. Feel better now?
You associate yourself with MLK only when convenient.
Most Koreans, or KAs for that matter, don’t really give much crap about MLK. I, for one, abhor, phony transparent displays of political correctness.
There is a reason why China Town wasn’t put to the torch by African-Americans. Most, but not all Koreans think they are racially superior to others, especially people with dark skin.
Whatever happened to the good old days when those who thought they were racially superior where doing all the torching, killing, raping, lynching, etc? Things are all ass-backwards now.
“Strange how American blacks found themselves better treated in Paris in the first half of the 20th century than at home.”
Yes, funny how history works like that in fits and starts.
Yes, the French can be quite tolerant when it is convenient and easy for them to be. It would be easy for Paris to show tolerance toward a US cultural icon, but the French prohibition on Moslem dress can provide some perspective about the relative commitment to civil rights. This commitment to diversity is nowhere better embodied than in the American activist legacy.
“Whatever happened to the good old days when those who thought they were racially superior where doing all the torching, killing, raping, lynching, etc? Things are all ass-backwards now.”
As this is meant to be ironic, I would certainly agree. Things are better, and great progress has been achieved.
But as globalvilliageidiot pointed out, cultural tolerance is, like marriage always “a work in progress” since relationships take work and vigilance. And nowhere on earth has this been more worked on than in the US.
As the white bashing here illustrates, most people throughout the world are to some extent prejudiced. However, few, have confronted the issues of a multicultural, multiracial society as in America. Criticisms may be made of America, but few nationalities are in a position to lecture the US on race relations, not having experienced such challenges.
So when a critic like Netizen Kim claims to “abhor phony transparent displays of political correctness,” it is worthwhile to help educate such people who obstensibly do not march to the same moral imperative to at least better understand the importance of civil rights to the greater American society.
chinese americans are racially tolerant versus Korean Americans?
wow, what an ignorant statement to say the least.
Have you ever been to LA’s Koreantown and investigated the location in geographic terms?
what an idiot.