While skimming over the Google News Elections headlines, I saw one that quickly caught my attention. The headline is "Phony Black friends ditch Clinton."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/...
Now.. I immediately thought the story would be about some dinner party spat, or some close personal friend leaving her campaign because of political reasons... But, no.. Unfortunately, to my surprise, the article is actually about how Black (the term African-American is never used in the story) people are untrustworthy. It goes on to suggest that Clinton has done more for Black people than Obama ever has. The story details how Blacks are "worshipful of Obama," and that "Win or lose, Hillary Clinton has earned the right to never trust the word of another black person."
I don't think I've been this insulted in a long long time. How about you?
I think the story speaks for itself, the author is obviously angry that Barack Obama has pretty much won the nomination today (FL will not have a revote). Any hope of Clinton winning via the superdelegates now seems hopelessly out of reach, especially with Nancy Pelosi categorically dismissing the idea. I think people are starting to realize that the Democratic Party is ready to move on after Clinton's imminent victory in Pennsylvania. And perhaps there are some Clinton supporters who are so outraged by her defeat, that they are looking to place blame on whoever they can find.. As always, it falls on African Americans... oh, wait a minute.. I mean Black people.
Reading this article, I can imagine Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity being fused together using some new mutagen developed in Dimension X solely for the purpose of creating the ultimate in racist talking points. I see no journalism here, no editorial skill, just spit and anger -- completely directed towards the African American community.
The author doesn't even ask why do African-Americans support Barack Obama. Nor does the author look at early polling within the AA community that shows African-American support for Obama in the early stages of the primary season below 30%. In South Carolina, before Bill Clinton showed up, Hillary had the "Black-vote" locked down, she was winning 65-35. After the numerous incidences of injecting race into the dialog (which John Edwards even pointed out, was coming from the Clinton campaign), it became obvious only on election night that Bill Clinton had solidified the AA vote. Normally, African-Americans do not vote 9-1 for any candidate, regardless of race. Remember, in SC, Obama won 8 out of 10 African Americans, perhaps less. However, in later primaries those numbers actually rose to 9 out of 10. Why? Because, Clinton didn't apologize! She continued to attempt to marginalize Barack Obama as the radical ghetto candidate; meanwhile, reminding every White woman on the planet to vote for her quite specifically because she is a woman and hint hint - she's white.
Now, with the news media drowning out Ferraro's extremely racist comments about Barack Obama in favor of Rev. Wright's fairly understandable argument (Has Hillary ever been called a Nigger?) I think we're beginning to see open season on our Black candidate for President. Open season from all sides, Democrats and Republicans alike. This is what Reverend Wright was talking about. This is what Rep. Clyburne (sp?) was talking about. If Barack Obama wasn't Black, people wouldn't write articles about how Black people shouldn't be trusted. People wouldn't say things like "Black people owe Hillary Clinton."
I'm too angry to continue writing this.. Read the article, and post your comments.. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail before notions like the ones presented in this article become mainstream -- I fear if they do, the Democratic party will be in a world of hurt, which would be very bad for our country.