Howard Dean Defends Record on Minorities

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3321861,00.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - Howard Dean defended his record on minorities Tuesday after rival Al Sharpton resurrected a 1995 Dean comment that affirmative action should be based ``not on race, but on class.''

In a statement, Sharpton responded to the news that Democratic Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr., planned to endorse Dean for president, sharply criticizing the former Vermont governor's record on affirmative action and gun rights.

``Howard Dean's opposition to affirmative action, his current support for the death penalty and historic support of the NRA's agenda amounts to an anti-black agenda that will not sell in communities of color in this country,'' Sharpton said.

Sharpton also cited a Dean remark from April 9, 1995 in which he was questioned on affirmative action. Dean said: ``You know, I think we ought to look at affirmative action programs based, not on race, but on class and opportunities to participate.''

more...

Cynthia McKinney will get more votes than "Ralph"Nadir if Dean is the candidate.

The NRA has not endorsed Dean. His position on guns is the same as Clinton's (wasn't Clinton called the first "black" president by blacks?). What Starbucks elitists are you talking about? You mean because people give him money online? Are you online? Are you a starbucks elitist?

And the rest of your comment is absurd. Who would vote for Cynthia McKinney for President? You're the only one pal.

Dean Quixote can't have it both ways. Why doesn't brave courageous Howard say something bad about the NRA?
Cynthia McKinney was blasting Bush and his cronies pretty much by herself while Dean was still doing focus groups. Also your asserton about me being the only one voting for Cynthia shows a lack of insight about urban voters.

Show me a poll where she even registers .01% for the presidential vote.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Dean is the rightwing talking heads favorite Dem candidate. Rove would rather run against the Governor of the Peoples Republic of Vermont than a certain Vietnam vet from the heartland.

She didn't try to fuel a Dean/Kerry fight or anything. :eyes:

Gee maybe Rove would have enjoyed running against a hick from Arkansas too.

Which Vietnam vet is from the heartland?

is that many of us have never seen the inside of a single Starbucks.

My Mother, who has never been in a coffeehouse her entire life, would like me to tell you to actually get out to a Dean meet-up, many of which take place in....SHUDDER! BOOKSTORES! GASP! Dean people read! RUN AWAY! BOOKS BAD!.

I like it. All the poor need a shot at a level playing field.

Does that make me racist?

Julie

social services designed for poor minorities it causes resentment. Then they vote Repub. I don't understand Sharpton's point. Is he saying black people should be treated differently for eternity? Basing assistance on need regardless of color seems like a step in the right direction.

If you divided AA beneficiaries by race, whites would be the largest group. And AA is not an "assistance" program; It's a remedial one. It's also not a poverty program; It's an anti-discrimination program.

I took part in a sort of affirmative action program that included minorities AND first generation college students.
Dean is talking about leveling the playing field institutionally across the board. He's totally on the right track. I have thought for a long time that ethnic minorities, women, and people with disabilities should form a massive coalition based on issues. The largest problems that all face are unemployment and underemployment largely due to a lack of educational opportuntiy.
Likewise, white AND black people who have limited opportunity because of poverty should be pursueing equalizing that opportunity together.
Affirmative action becomes much more palatable to conservative leaning individuals when placed in it's true context. Opportunity. The initiative should include ALL affected groups. This joins people in a quest.

If it's Dean, won't many african-americans become disenfranchised by this 'leveling' talk?

Don't misunderstand what "leveling" the playing field means. I am talking about expanding opportunity for everyone. Why would anyone who is negatively affected by the WASP power structure object to leveling of the playing field for other people as well? The only way the power structure is going to change is if there are large numbers fighting against and competing with it. When the goal is to flatten a social hierarchy, all members on the lower rungs need to be involved.
The Democrats have worked for all of the groups I mentioned. When one group calls for more preference, the most important issues can get lost.

Being white and poor is diamettrically different from being black and poor. So much so that poor whites control almost as much average net wealth as highest earning blacks. Upper-white-collar blacks have less wealth than lower-blue-collar whites. If a black family earned the average white income, they would be among the top twenty percent of black earners.

That being said, it's no wonder why 75 percent of poor whites live in middle-class neighborhoods, while the same percentage of poor blacks live in poor neighborhoods. Looks like the playing field has already been leveled a bit for poor whites.

At least here in the south that just isn't true. Poor whites live in the same shitty trailers or apartments the poor blacks do. They DO NOT live in middle class neighborhoods or they would be MIDDLE CLASS.

Where did you get that 75% statistic?

not at all.

Julie

In 2000 the stats were that African American and Latino families averaged only 10% of the family wealth that white families do. Which means that no matter how difficult it may be for certain white individuals, that as a group, it's still much easier for whites to find the resources to get out of poverty than blacks or latinos.

IMNSHO I think a good way to understand the why the difference in family wealth is so important is to compare folks who are living in public housing and folks who are homeless. Folks poor enough to live in public housing have a lot of troubles, but they have more resources than homeless people. They have a shelter, privacy, running water, heat, electricity, a way to store and cook food, etc. And even if they only have some of those things in their units, they still have more than homeless people. I think that if you gave folks the choice between living in public housing or being homeless that almost all of them would chose the projects.

The difference in family wealth between whites and minorities is similar. A white person who wants to start their own business, or go to college, or even just feed their kids has a much, much, much better change of having someone in their family who can help out. The difference between having a grandmother who lets you use her rusted out junker car to drive to a job interviews and having to depend on public transportantion can be the difference between making it and not making it.

I think that as long as there is such a huge disperity in family wealth between racial groups, you need to have race be one of the major criteria for Affirmative Action programs.

"I think, lastly, the whole notion of our showing our differences is good. But let us not forget that our differences should be toward the aim of winning against Bush."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A5841-2003Oct9¬Found=true

I saw him on Bill O'spinner's show and he really sucked and his attacks on Dean seemed to be pretty sad and confused. I expected better.....

He had his prints all over that and as I recall he never apologized for his role in that fiasco.

and joins Reps JJ Jr's and Major Owens' previous defense of Dean:

"I think Dean's record on civil rights issues, on affirmative action -- his willingness to talk about race in a very inclusive way -- has been refreshing," said Brazile, who is African American. "These long-shot candidates, all they're doing is taking aim at the top tier because they're frustrated. I think Reverend Sharpton should keep his focus on ideas."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31895-2003Oct28.html

That is, if they haven't already met

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

But as she is a nationally recognized African American, her remark is relevant.

She favors Gep and I suspect no Rove intro would be required there.

qualifies you for the darkside, then I guess every canidate is pretty much out of the running then, since running in political circles exposes you to meeting Republicans. Al Franken should just shut up too, huh?

Not that I'm defending Rove...he's a turd blossom of the highest caliber.

"...then I guess every canidate is pretty much out of the running then..."

You see some people are either working for the other side or seriously masochistic.

Whooooops....I guess we're screwed. I think they've all met the Evil One at one time or another.

:crazy:

It's as if they seriously can't think of anything else to say.

I guess it's supposed to be a threat. I don't care to waste my beautiful mind worrying about what Rove thinks. ;-)

It's good for him to be in there keepin' everyone on track. Maybe this comment will make Dean go out of his way just a little more to reach out to african american voters.

He was the only white Presidential candidate to attend the anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech. Would that not be reaching out?

I wonder if attacks like these do nothing more than further the cynicism and disgust for the process and turn off more potential voters? We need all the Dem voters we can get to remove Bush in 2004. Are these types of attacks necessary? It's as though Sharpton wanted to counter Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s endorsement of Dean.. perhaps he was pissed about it.

Expanding affirmative action to include class would save the program politically, and it's already being done. At the University of Michigan
where the court cases went down, you got 10 points for being a minority and 10 points for being a poor white. What's wrong with that?

But that's not what Dean said in 1995. He didn't just say we should add class as a criteria. He also said we should eliminate race as a criteria.

Dean thinks that poor people who have been discriminated against should benefit from AA

Dean thinks that people who have been discriminated against due to gender should benefit from AA

Dean thinks that people who have been discriminated against due to sexual orientation should benefit from AA

But if you've been discriminated against because of your race, you should not benefit from AA.

Sorry. But as a white person growing up poor, in a family that had not one college graduate, I can see no reason why someone, simply because of their ethnic background, should have an advantage over me in getting into college if all other things were equal.

I think a socioeconomic class scale is valid. Why does everyone assume that people of color are automatically disadvantaged? All of my friends and colleauges of color, who happen to have degrees and succesful lives, find that rather insulting. I would too... I don't know, maybe we should make sure all schools are equal, invest in literacy the way we invest in wars, create programs to increase parental involvement in the faltering schools, and stop perpetuating a lower class view of other people just because of the color of their skin. The disabled fought, and are still fighting, to change that type of thinking. I think affirmative action has merit, but it nags at me that it does more harm than good to the people it supposedly helps.. by creating a permanent lower class. I'd rather see the US level the PATH to college for all students, rather than level the field when they arrive.

You can provide aid on the basis of economic disadvantage
and on the basis of racial disadvantage at the same time.

Statement by Rep. Jesse L. Jackson on Howard Dean's Record

Congressman Jesse L. Jackson issued a statement today responding to an attack on Howard Dean by Rev. Al Sharpton. The New York Times announced earlier today that Rep. Jackson will support Governor Dean's campaign in the coming weeks.

Congressman Jackson stated:

When it comes to addressing issues that directly affect African Americans, and indirectly affects all Americans, Gov. Dean clearly has good record. Up until this point -- until I indicated my intention to endorse Gov. Dean -- the Democratic campaign has been free of such racial rhetoric. I would recommend that it remain so. Such rhetoric will not contribute to defeating George W. Bush in 2004. Indeed, it will insure his re-election.

Jackson Urges Democrats to Accentuate the Positive

Calls On All Democrats To Reject Racial Rhetoric

Congressman Jesse L. Jackson today said, "Al Sharpton is making a great contribution to the Democratic Party with his performances in the debates, his inspirational speeches on the campaign trail, his raising of the political consciousness of voters on issues that many of the other candidates will not touch, and by bringing new voters into the process.

"But no contribution of the Rev. Al Sharpton has been greater than the role he has played of statesman in the debates - of urging fellow competitors to 'first do not harm' to one another. It was Al Sharpton who said in the first debate in South Carolina, televised by ABC, that the 'Democrats should not have a debate and George Bush turn out to be the winner.' He has constantly reminded his fellow Democratic presidential candidates that the goal is to defeat President Bush in November, 2004. He has also said that while he understands there will be competition between each of them, none of them should do any harm to the other candidates that would prevent them from defeating George Bush.

"Unfortunately, Rev. Sharpton has rejected his own advice. The spirit of Rev. Sharpton's release in that regard is over-the-top and mostly inaccurate. Rev. Sharpton is inaccurate when he says that Howard Dean is 'opposed to affirmative action.' Even the 1995 quote he attributes to Gov. Dean is not a statement 'opposed' to affirmative action, but an argument for a broader criteria. More importantly, during this campaign Governor Dean has clearly stated for the record that he supports affirmative action based on race, gender and class - which is what the law requires.

"Whoever the ultimate nominee of the Democratic Party is I intend to support -- and I will not agree with them on every issue. Gov. Dean and I may just have to agree to disagree on the death penalty. However, I would remind Rev. Sharpton that both he and I supported Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 even though he supported the death penalty and ending welfare as we know it -- both of which we disagreed with.

"With respect to gun control, Gov. Dean supports all of the common sense FEDERAL laws and proposed laws with respect to renewal of the assault weapons ban, holding gun manufacturers responsible, adequately checking purchasers at gun shows. But beyond that he argues that different states have different needs, and I agree. Not every state values hunters and hunting equally and I respect and agree with Gov. Dean in that regard.

"I don't understand why I am being singled out. Rep. Major Owens, from New York, endorsed Gov. Dean some time ago, but none of these issues were raised. No member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has endorsed Rev. Sharpton, and there were other members of the CBC in the New York Times article who indicated that they too may be on the verge of endorsing Gov. Dean.

"I also don't understand Rev. Sharpton's attempt to introduce 'race' into the campaign by using such rhetoric as 'anti-black' with respect to Gov. Dean. I challenge all of the other candidates to urge Rev. Sharpton to resist using such inflammatory rhetoric.

"Clearly, Gov. Dean is not anti-black and it is ridiculous for Rev. Sharpton to compare him to President George Bush in that regard. When it comes to addressing issues that directly affect African Americans, and indirectly affects all Americans, Gov. Dean clearly has good record. Up until this point -- until I indicated my intention to endorse Gov. Dean - the Democratic campaign has been free of such racial rhetoric. I would recommend that it remain so. Such rhetoric will not contribute to defeating George W. Bush in 2004. Indeed, it will insure his re-election."

Posted by Joe Rospars at 07:30 PM
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002031.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=188605

Statement by Rep. Major Owens on Howard Dean's Leadership

Congressman Major R. Owens of New York issued a statement today responding to an attack on Howard Dean by Rev. Al Sharpton. He joins Rep. Jesse L. Jackson of Illinois, who also made a statement on the matter.

Rep. Owens said:

And no one should go forth with the mistaken assumption that the vital issue of war and peace is not important to the African American constituency. When the Congressional Black Caucus members overwhelmingly voted against the waste of 87 billion dollars in Iraq, they were expressing the will of the people in our neighborhoods who insist that our needs be met here at home first. Our people, our rank and file is already with Howard Dean. Black leaders must run to catch up.

Statement of Congressman Major R. Owens

"Al Sharpton is working hard and doing a good job of pushing for a Democratic Party agenda with a full inclusion of the issues that matter most to African Americans and working families. If media exposure was his only concern, he would do better by running in the General Election as an Independent. But Sharpton has chosen not to be a spoiler. His bottom line is the same as mine -- retire George W. Bush before he totally wrecks our democracy.

"To achieve our common ground goal of a Democrat in the White House, Howard Dean is the only candidate with a clear enough vision combined with toughness and independence. With respect to African American concerns, Dean starts with an evolving slate. The "doors of his church" are wide open to a broad spectrum of African American leadership. After his election, Howard Dean can be expected to bring into his circle of new national leadership more Black leaders than any of the other candidates. He has this flexibility because he doesn't owe the establishment any dues.

"And no one should go forth with the mistaken assumption that the vital issue of war and peace is not important to the African American constituency. When the Congressional Black Caucus members overwhelmingly voted against the waste of 87 billion dollars in Iraq, they were expressing the will of the people in our neighborhoods who insist that our needs be met here at home first. Our people, our rank and file is already with Howard Dean. Black leaders must run to catch up."

Posted by Joe Rospars at 09:32 PM
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002032.html

But far be it for me to get in the way of some good old uninformed, useless, and really pathetic Dean-Bashing from those who cannot say anything positive about theit own candidate.

Maybe Al and you Bashers should go read up on Deans policies before jerking that knee...

While I'm not about to take to the streets to protest efforts by universities to assemble a more racially diverse student body, I am far more comfortable with the idea of affirmative action based on socioeconomic status rather than race.

You'll be in big trouble. I can just hear it now, "You don't even understand affirmative action".

But I agree, and think it would be much more palatable for many, and might even take that wedge issue away from the Repubes. But I am not, of course against Affirmative Action in its current form either. Maybe a little of both.

Maybe the Repukes are correct in that Clark was a plant by the Clintons because I believe Sharpton also supports Clark.

As much a I enjoyed Sharpton thus far, he is dividing the party with these statements. As a black man myself, my choice is Dean over Clark!

Vermont is lily white.

So let me get this straight. Are you saying people who want to run for president MUST come from a state with larger populations of minorities? Well what is the cut-off? Does Indiana have enough blacks? How about Arizona? Or do you include Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans?

The man worked in a hospital in a poor black neighborhood in NYC. He also spent a summer working in Florida with Latinos (that's where he learned to speak Spanish).

Do you really want to play this game of "elimination" of a candidate because he's from a certain state? Doesn't sound very American to me. Whereas Sharpton, a black man who has probably spent the majority of his life in black circles (church, neighborhoods, political groups) is not held to the same standard. Since his church probably has 0 white people, why don't you raise that issue? How can he really know what white people are like when he doesn't live around them?