The African American HubNewsbites70
Former President Jimmy Carter's remarks yesterday in the Carter Center in Atlanta puts a real face on the Illinois Democratic Primary race for governor. Just as Jimmy Carter points out, the racism that many white Americans harbor towards President Barak Obama, is evidenced by the behavior, demonstrated daily, in Illinois main media i.e. the Chicago Tribune, Sun-Times and Chicago television and radio stations, towards William "Dock' Walls in his bid for the nomination to lead Illinois' Democrats for governor. The Illinois media does not feel that a Black man who graduated from Chicago's public schools is qualified to lead the state. They can only project a governor's race between two Irish leaders, Pat Quinn and Dan Hynes; even though fifty percent of Illinois Democratic vote comes out of Cook County and the city of Chicago. That Democratic vote is majority Black, but every article written in the Sun-Times, every article written in the Tribune, footage viewed on television or broadcast on the radio consistently fails to mention William Walls as a candidate for governor. Be it tax policy, Burr Oaks Cemetery or labor relations, it's all done with a Quinn/Hynes spin, which fails to even mention William Walls. Walls, a former top aid to Chicago's first Black mayor, Harold Washington, is a Tuskegee graduate and native Chicagoan. Walls is also a graduate of the Kent College of Law and a leading progressive advocate of reform politics. Obviously, all these salient attributes are being disregarded, simply because William Walls is a Black man, and the media is fearful of informing Illinois Democrats (particularly Cook County Democrats) that a progressive Black candidate is in the race. In this post Blagojevich era, the media is fearful of informing an Illinois Black Democratic electorate that there is an alternative to the Irish dominated Democratic machine, which has mislead the State of Illinois for the past eight years. The Chicago media was never truly comfortable with Harold Washington (the reformer) as Mayor of Chicago and did everything in its power to split and confuse the electorate following his untimely death. While editorializing for campaign reform, ethics reform and tax reform, the Chicago media really only wants reform if it's tied to white leadership. The media was willing to accept Blagojevich; who, while not Irish, represented white ethnics from Chicago's north-side; until he pissed off the south-side Irish block of the Democratic party. It was this south side Irish Democratic block, lead by Democratic Speaker of the House, Micheal Madigan, that orchestrated Blagojevich's removal as governor and replaced him with their choice of Pat Quinn (a north-side Irishman), who now is dressed up by the south-side Irish as their man for governor. This was made evident by the Cook County Democratic Party's recent endorsement of Pat Quinn for governor.
Real reform in Illinois has to come from a real reformer. William Walls is a real reformer. William Walls constantly challenges Daley's corrupt policies. He has challenged them in the courts. He has challenged them in the elections and he has all of the characteristics of a governor that's going to take on the Illinois status-quo. This includes the lobbyists, the corporations and the unions in the pocket of the corrupt Democratic machine. William Walls represents the only true change for Illinois state government, but the media has no respect for a Black man. The media does not think a Black man is qualified to run the State of Illinois. I hope soon that we see a change in this racist attitude by the media. Until then, I urge Bill Walls to keep talking to the people of Illinois - keep talking change to the people. Don't count on nor trust the media. The media is only trying to find a way to confuse the people again. Maybe, after they come up with their plan of confusion, they will begin to mention William Walls as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for Governor of Illinois.
The author of this is not ready for a black president, nor is Jimmy Carter. Sad.
You'd think after being pulled from the deck so much, the race card would be in tatters by now.
You would think. I was sorry to hear the comment from President Carter the other day. However, I appreciated the White House's response in the matter.
Please....like I am racist because I do not agree with Obama and didn't vote for him. How offensive. President Carter's misinformed generalization was absolutely disheartening to me. Does he really believe that? (I guess so....)
If America was so ridiculously racist, then how on earth did President Obama win the presidency? Hmmmm. Same way Clinton won - less people voted Republican last year for obvious reasons!
Today I was talking to one of my good friends who is black and really upset about this. He said: "so I, a black guy, am racist because I don't agree with Obama and didn't vote for him?....really, President Carter?"
You need to back-off the race-baiting! You know damn well it just doesn't apply you and anyone else useing this as an argument is just trying to get something you don't deserve! Try and be a man instead of a con-man!
I live in Illinois, tell me what he stands for? Chicago has had two Black mayor's, two Black Senator's, one Black President, the head of the Illinois Senate is Black and we don't want a Black governor! Are you living in the 1960's? Oh, Cook County has had two consecutive Black leaders.
Should the White's complain their jobs are being taken, I don't think you'll hear that.
Did you know the head of the Cook County Court system is Black. What are you complaining about?
you know jimmy carter is one of the worst presidents ever
thats what you get for voting in a peanut farmer
Barack Obama himself contradicted Carter and says he doesn't believe that Joe Wilson's opposition was motivated by racism.
I don't think that matters to the shills! Nor does it matter that an anti Semite made the accusation!
I guarantee that was a PR move for the benefit of the country as a whole. But spin partisanship the way you would want.
Shur 'nuff. That's what the entire profession is about.
You both have a serious problem reading sarcasm...or anything else, actually...for that matter. But what else is new?
You have a serious problem by not being very consistent! Sarcasm? Yeah right!
Don't worry Tex. When one knows it all, oh that's Barack Obama. He told O'Reilly he wanted a missile system in Europe on the campaign, he lied. He was going to close Gitmo immediately, lie. The troops will come home from Iraq soon, lie. He won't raise taxes on the middle class, well not directly, lie. All he wants to do is confuse use with his mean nothing words. Some people can not be understood, but it's always the other persons fault.
To be fair sarcasm doesn't really come across too successfully in plain text form.
Who woke up Jimmy the Nut. Go back to sleep Jimmy. It was only a dream. Go back to sleep. Yes, you are still the greatest president ever, now go back to sleep. Rock a by baby. Rock a by babe.
I don't know what is going on in Illinois politics, but "We, the people" are not made because BO is black. We are made about his policies. So what does policies have to do with racism, less than the fact that he wants to destroy all big business, and send all jobs to the inner city. I am not sure who is the inner cities, if that is mainly blacks? I want everyone to succeed, have jobs, and health care. I also believe the old principle that you give a person a fish, he eats for one day. You teach him to fish, and he may provide for himself and his family. Note: I said may, if he has the ambition.
Giving things to the inner city and those unfortunate does not solve anything. It needs to be learned and earned. Just look at the Native Americans which we give money to every month. There is a high rate of alcoholism, depression, suicide, along with many other things. They have a high dropout rate of school, unemployment and troubles in life. As if we would treat them as normal people who have to work and make a honest day pay, many of their problems would go away.
I believe the policy issues are more politics than racism. I think the vigor in which they are opposed is rooted in racism. "Racism" may be too strong of a word, considering the history of America, but I do believe that because he is Black there is a different level of disrespect in the manner of which he is treated by American citizens and fellow politicians. There is a tone in which he is being "attacked" with, in a way that I've not seen a president have to deal with previously. I've known hundreds of people that disagreed with Bush, but he had to leave the country to have a person stand up and blatantly disrespect and attempt to demean him (referring to "the shoe" incident). Never in this country did I hear a politician heckle him during a speech, calling him a liar...and Lord knows Bush told some major, harmful lies. It takes a hypocrite to pretend that Obama isn't dealing with unique circumstances due to his race. Read the history folks, we have it...it's very ugly. It is impossible for him to NOT have racism to face as president of this country.
A guy called Obama out on a lie he told during a speech. That isn't blatantly disrespectful. Heck it's not the worst thing to happen in Congress, not by a long shot. Google Charles Sumner beating and see what you get. He was crippled for giving a speech. Even Bush just had a shoe thrown at him. Being called a liar or having a shoe thrown at you is hardly in the same league as being beaten till you're crippled.
Do you have people who believe that Obama can't hack it as president because he's black. Probably. In that way they're no different from the black people who think that Obama can do no wrong just because he's our first black President. Truth is, he's a guy like any other. He puts his pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us. The only difference is that he's the President and as such, much like Bush before him, has the capacity to do a great deal of harm. It's the office that's the problem, not the man at the desk, when it's all said and done.
I don't like his policies. Were I ever to meet him in real life, I'd probably think him charming and erudite. It wouldn't make me like his policies one whit more, but I'm sure I'd enjoy speaking to the man.
A. If it wasn't disrespectful, then why did he later apologize? Because he knows it was rude, disrespectful, and out of line.
B. If you read my entire comment you'd see that I mentioned "the shoe incident", the difference is that happened in another country. Yes, people from other countries have shown our president blatant disrespect, and I agree the shoe was worse - but that wasn't an American disrespecting the president of his own country.
C. When was the last time you saw men showing up to the president's town hall meeting, IN AMERICA, with a gun strapped to his hip for all to see? Was that a show of disrespect that rivals even "the shoe"?
Again, as I said I do truly believe that the issue of not liking his policies are more about partisan politics than it is about race - I get that. Not everyone I know buys that, but I accept it. It is the way it's being communicated that has a disrespectful tone behind it that I believe is rooted in racism. That's not to say everyone that disagrees with Obama is a racist, in fact, having an emotion "rooted in racism" is not a charge that you are necessarily a racist. But it is an emotion driven by the racist society in which we live.
I'd say it fair to say if anyone believes Obama is good solely "because he's Black" is rooted in racism as well. Not because that person is a racist, but because his emotion is driven by the inherent racism this country has been teaching us all since the 1800s. Are there White and Black people today that are still racially prejudiced? Absolutely. Are there exceptions? Absolutely. Is there a gray area somewhere in between the two? That's where I stand alone oft times in the belief that there is. That gray area is colored by the two hard driven Black & White lines they can't help but to be affected by.
Dude, get over racism already. If someone is prejudiced, they're going to be prejudiced. In all the important things people are free. They can vote, freely associate, we no longer have "separate but equal" facilities, etc. Those things went out with the 1960's. Do you really think a law or public opinion is going to change how someone feels?
Why does it have to be black and white? I'm half-Mexican, where does that put me in your black-white dichotomy? What about Asians? Turks? Armenians? Muslims? Sikhs? Chinese? You can live life in one of two ways. You can see racism under every bush, tree and behind every face. Or you can see that we're all people. Sometimes that's good, sometimes bad, but we're in the end, all people.
I know which type of person I am, do you?
Bush was called a liar on the floor of congress more than once by Democrats, if your contention is that he is a liar and deserved it then mine is Obama is and deserves the same treatment! Obama lied about what Cap and Trade would cost! Any health care bill passed with a public option will include Illegals somehow! Sorry man, its not racism its sick and tired of being lied to by our elected leaders no matter the party!
The "you-lie" incident was one incident by one man; and I'm not sure if President Obama were a White guy with the same policies and words, the same thing would not have happened. There are a lot of people who are in favor of his policies, but there are a lot who aren't; and I can't recall any president (since I've been old enough to be paying attention) who has introduced so many different ideas in such a short time.
I think, as a result, he has upset not only the good number of people who never were in favor of him, but many of the people who were originally in favor of him. That makes for a high number of people not being too thrilled with him right now. People who believe that any number of the things in this healthcare plan are bad for the country are feeling particularly threatened by it. Other presidents in recent history may have angered people, but much of the time the "potential victims" of those presidents' policies have been limited to individual segments of the population. Obama's "thing" has the potential of making a larger percentage of the population feel they, or their children, will be negatively impacted. Then you have the thing that a lot of people believe he's undermining the general freedoms they think Americans should have. So I think that explains a lot of why so many people are so angry.
Then, though, the President, himself, has made it a point to show people that he and his family are "regular people, just like them". I think the motives for that may be to try to get disenfranchised people, who never saw themselves as having any potential for success, to see him as a role model. It may be backfiring, though, because if you work hard to show how "regular" and how "non-lofty" you are, people won't see you with the same level of "intimidation" that some may see a President who always keeps that jacket and tie on and doesn't try to come across "like everyone else". We've never had a President who spoke openly about things like using cocaine, or who has used language that is "cool" rather than "stuffy and proper". He's made it clear he doesn't want people to see the office as "unapproachable" - so I think what we have now (if what you perceive is accurate, and I'm not saying it isn't) is a President with whom at least some people feel freer to be just that much less respectful.
Very eloquently put! I also believe that is a big part of it as well, great point! You just earned a new fan!
Excellent, you broke it down wonderfully. I'm not so sure about the last part though. Presidents have always tried to cultivate the "common man" image because it makes people more comfortable with them. Like when Clinton got a dog. It deflected criticism from him and smoothed his relations with the American people. After all, he's a dog person, he must not be all bad.
Most of the backlash is because too much is being changed too fast and there isn't much talk about it. It's got nothing to do with race and everything to do with the actions the President is taking.
I did not see anything of that kind here on Hubpages. Can't say for newspapers or TV cause I don't read or watch them
The deal is that the former president's words are being fiercely misconstrued for partisan purposes. Here is an excerpt of what he said:
"When a radical fringe element of demonstrators and others begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler or when they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy, those kinds of things are beyond the bounds," the Democrat told students at Emory University on Wednesday.
"I think people who are guilty of that kind of personal attack against Obama have been influenced to a major degree by a belief that he should not be president because he happens to be African-American," he added.
"An overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man," he said.
He also was referencing the South, an area he is familiar with, in regards to Wilson (who, btw, likes the idea of flying the confederate flag).
The Whitehouse is indeed pulling a smart PR move, too, distancing themselves from any divisiness--for the benefit of the country, but also, for Obama's political efficacy. Gibbs' (Obama's press secretary) language was also a bit more subtle, in all reality. He stated that Carter's comments "add to the dialogue" about race relations and the culture wars we are currently in the midst of. He also said that he felt that the reason people opposed Obama was because of the current economic status of the country. Which is pure sociology/psychology in regards to referencing "the other."
And of course, there are those opposed to Obama on policy issues. Nobody doubts that. But that again, was not the substance behind Carter's words.
It's sad...Carter is given a mike to be the useful idiot for the Dems. He lives in 2009, but his mind is stuck in the segregated south. He's just not self-aware enough to realize the stupidity of his comments. I use to live with an uncle a little older than Carter is now. Whenever I talked to him in the mid 1980s, I got the impression that his brain never advanced past the 1960s. As he got older, his mind did not keep up with the times.
Carter was the publcially nicest, but meanest president of the modern era. This tooth fairy's "dream come true" was a southern snob who never accomplished anything as president to be proud of. And don't wave "Camp David" in my face. I'll assure you that if Camp David was a success, it was a glorious accident that Carter got credit for it.
Carter pawned himself off as a man of the people, but would not even talk to the "hired help" at the White House. He spoke the gutless talk of liberalspeak, fawning over the little people in public and scorning them in private. No wonder the Dems love him so.
Carter has exposed an "ugly face" but it's not the one you think.
You hit it rght on. He is also an anti-Semite , when exposed many Jews that worked at his library quit. I remember gas lines and the start of "Nightline" on ABC. This made American's feel inadequate.
I want to let you know first of all, I am Cherokee, Blackfoot, Black, Irish and German. This has to do with what ever can be done to get everyone to look at my left hand while I work with the right hand. It's done in magic all the time, slight of hand. In politics it's called waging the dog. Don't look at the guy behind the curtain, you may see the truth and stop him.
" When was the last time you saw men showing up to the president's town hall meeting, IN AMERICA, with a gun strapped to his hip for all to see? Was that a show of disrespect that rivals even "the shoe"?
I don't know how many people with guns have attended a town hall, there have not been as many town hall meetings covered by the media as these have. I have seen two men with handguns one White and one Black, which ones the racist?
Personally, I don't know either of these men so I don't feel comfortable speculating on their racial views. However, if the anti-war protestors had shown up with automatic rifles it would be met with counter-insurgency tactics . . . well atleast it would have prevented us from getting teargassed, maced and have ammonia thrown in our eyes.
Seriously Clinton also had a big tendency to dress more casual, especially on the campaign trail. Also, he wore some pretty revealing running shorts, and at least we have not see Obama do that. Clinton also spoke openly about trying pot once, and shared with the kids on MTV he wore boxers instead of briefs. Presidents sometimes change with the times, and Obama seems to be a little bit more extroverted than certain other presidents.
Those of us that voted for him knew he was going to implement many new policies, and I am one of those glad to see the fresh new ideas. Obama was smart to distance himself from Carter's remarks the other day, but those statements were taken out of context. Reading twitter there seems to be a lot of animosity and hate for the man. I actually agree with Carter's statements about the fringe element, and it is sad people are even making excuses for the people portraying Obama as Hitler. Why are people so afraid to admit there may be some prejudice behind the signs. However, Obama was smart not to play into this game, but the signs are just wrong and do have racist implications.
“Dude, get over racism already."
Dude, I wish I had the luxury.
"Why does it have to be black and white? I'm half-Mexican, where does that put me in your black-white dichotomy? What about Asians? Turks? Armenians? Muslims? Sikhs? Chinese?"
1. Because I'm Black...and so is Obama.
2. Because the history of Black and White people in America is unique to that of any other cultures as they relate to one another, therefore there is as unique a residual effect.
3. This puts you on the outside looking in, or dab smack in the middle...depends on how active you choose to be. BTW, how did Muslims get mixed up in that bunch...that's a religion, not a race.
"Sometimes that's good, sometimes bad, but we're in the end, all people."
I hope it didn't take you long to realize that. However, the interesting thing about people is that we're all individuals, with all our own little unique history, which has shaped us all to see and view things with our own unique little twist...that's why the Hubs are fantastic - we get an opportunity to learn from each other, and get small peak into the viewpoint of our fellow man (and woman).
"I know which type of person I am, do you?”
No sir, I don't know which type of person you are.
“I have seen two men with handguns one White and one Black, which ones the racist?”
The one that let either one of them get close to the president with a handgun. However let's clarify, I didn't call the man with the handgun "a racist"...that's you giving me an ultimatum that one or the other has to be. I said it was a show of disrespect - in which case, BOTH men in your example are guilty.
When people get tired enough of the race card being played, you're going to see real racism. Most people are good decent people. I'd say in the 60's that people were basically good and decent. If white people truly hated people of color no amount of nonviolent protest would have gotten anything to change.
You are so full of crap. Tell that to the Irish or the Italians. Both white and both hated because they were considered subhuman. Oh yeah, they were also hated for their religion too. The black experience is not all that much different from anyone else.
Say what you want about the US, but we've never had pogroms here nor systematic mass murder of minorities. Even when we did herd people into camps, they weren't worked to death, beaten and starved like they were in Europe. If the US is so bad for your "people", why do you stay?
I'd say I'm less of a racist than you are. After all I see people as people first, then note their differences, you base your opinions on people based on the color of their skin. I don't care what the color of your skin is, I care about the content of your character and what that says about you as a human being.
Of course you don't you can't see me past the color of my skin.
The author of this thread never replied to anything. Evidentally he wants his score to go up. Totally gutless!
by Marshall Terry Bolling 10 years ago
The African American HubNewsbites70By Broker-TradeFormer President Jimmy Carter's remarks yesterday in the Carter Center in Atlanta puts a real face on the Illinois Democratic Primary race for governor. Just as Jimmy Carter points out, the racism that many white Americans harbor towards President...
by Mary Neal 6 years ago
Former president Jimmy Carter says America's not a 'functioning democracy'? What do you think?Former President Jimmy Carter, in an interview with Der Spiegel, said he supported whistleblower Edward Snowden and that the NSA’s domestic spying program was against American values. Carter went on to say...
by retief2000 4 years ago
Is Obama a worse foreign policy president than Jimmy Carter?In 1978, then United States President, Jimmy Carter hosted peace talks between Israel and Egypt resulting in a peace that has endured. A major re-alignment of military and political power followed and Egypt abandoned the Soviet Union and...
by Peeples 7 years ago
While I am not a republic nor completly white, I am so tired of the constant assumption that Republicans are just white racist. Why do people assume this? It would be like saying Democrats are just poor black and hispanic people. See how ignorant that sounds! Why?
by ahorseback 3 years ago
Sounds kind of racist to me , It just reminds me though that racism plays a huge part FROM the positions minorities too . 90 percent of Black voters voted for Obama , proving racism exists in the black community , now he says this , I...
by JAKE Earthshine 19 months ago
Jimmy Carter’s approval rating was 43% in his second May of his second term as president, a perfect match with Mr. Trump’s which is virtually identical at 43% :And that’s really not so bad for Mr. Trump who is currently within the tightening scope of two major criminal investigations and...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|