digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

DNC slams McCain for 'pandering to far right' on MLK day

rawstory.com — "Nearly 24 years after voting against creating a holiday honoring Martin Luther King, John McCain is spending today at the inauguration of Alabama Governor Bob Riley who is a member of an organization that has been criticized for excluding African Americans," states the DNC press release.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Popdmb, on 10/12/2007, -27/+22John McCain....oh how the mighty have fallen.
    • laplacian, on 10/12/2007, -22/+26the politcal BS begins. I wonder if digg will get bogged down in a million of these silly propoganda pieces as the presidential race picks up or if only real stories about issues will make it to the front page.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -13/+25So this is how all those people who said they would vote for John McCain justify changing their minds. He is being accused of ATTENDING an event for some guy who is a MEMBER of an organization that has been ACCUSED of excluding african americans. That's a big stretch just to slander someones name.
    • Gerz1219, on 10/12/2007, -21/+16Give me a break. We have too many federal holidays as it is -- conservative lawmakers were right to vote against MLK Day. It doesn't make them racists. It makes them realists who understand that a federal holiday is just an excuse for millions of people to skip work, costing the economy millions of dollars, and go to a barbecue or other social gathering while completely ignoring whatever they're supposed to be honoring. Martin Luther King Day exists because Democratic lawmakers wanted a bullet point in an attack ad, and it worked, because it's still being brought up 24 years later. We should get rid of Columbus Day and Presidents' Day while we're at it -- or does that mean I hate white people? If you want a day off from work, take a sick day. Other than Christmas, Thanksgiving and New Years, there is exactly one day people should automatically get off -- Election Day. It's absolutely sickening that millions of people don't vote because they have to work on Election Day, and a lot of these people get off on Martin Luther King Day and sit around the house watching TV.
    • theodicey, on 10/12/2007, -16/+16McCain didn't have to attend this inauguration at all.

      He backs politicians like Bob Riley and George Wallace Jr. as a way of winking at the racist Republican base. It's called the Southern Strategy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy), and it's why George W Bush, and almost every other Republican presidential candidate, appeared in 2000 at bigoted Bob Jones University, which at the time banned interracial dating.

      Ironically, at the time John McCain condemned Bush for appearing at Bob Jones U. without denouncing their racist policies. Maybe he should take his own advice.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8The article you linked to about the "southern strategy" says the following:

      "The southern strategy was used during the 1988 election, during the Willie Horton controversy. It has been used as recently as the 2000 election. During this election, George W. Bush political strategist Karl Rove was alleged to have conducted a push poll, suggesting to conservative Republican South Carolina primary voters that primary opponent John McCain had fathered an "illegitimate black child.""
    • theodicey, on 10/12/2007, -10/+10Yeah, Bush and Karl Rove used the Southern Strategy to turn the Republican base against McCain, now it looks like McCain is going to use it to get the base on his side.

      Especially since he just hired Terry Nelson, who was responsible for the racist anti-Harold Ford ads also mentioned in the "Southern Strategy" article.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -12/+11Bob Riley likes apples, McCain likes apples. Bob Riley is a racist, therefore McCain must be a racist too! ZOMG!!!!!!!!!
    • xGORDOx, on 10/12/2007, -12/+12McCain pandering to the right on MLK day?

      Where is the link to John Edwards pandering to the left during his speech?

      They're politicians running for President it's what they do.
    • theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5The reason McCain got his ass handed to him in SC in 2000 is because he butted his nose in the Confederate Naval Jack controversy. When Bush was asked the same question, he responded with the correct answer, it is purely up to the people of SC to decide. He killed himself here, not any supposed push poll about having an illegitimate child.

    • catalysis, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4"Where is the link to John Edwards pandering to the left during his speech?"

      but, but its MLK day and you are allowed to pander to the left on that day. Its in the constitution. No politician may address conservatives on MLK day.
    • xGORDOx, on 10/12/2007, -8/+4Dude, MLK was a Republican.
    • omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2There's a reason the South turned Republican after desegregation, folks. And it wasn't because they were aching to join the party of Lincoln.
    • Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Does anyone really expect that the DNC would have flowery things to say about a Republican at the start of the presidential campaign season?
    • MrFlesh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@gerz1219

      Well following your logic. We should have 7 day 16 hour work weeks....until we develop a drug that gives humans the ability to for go sleep. Then we can have a 24 hour work week. You know because everyone wants to spend the rest of thier life making less than 1% of what they actually bring in to the company. Who needs barbeques, breaks, sleep, a life...when work should be thier life. You may be surprised to hear this but most of the population could give a flyin ***** about how much businesses lose when we get a day off.
  • DIGGerPhelpsND, on 10/12/2007, -14/+46While McCain is veering sharply to the right, the media is still portraying him as a rebel or a maverick. People are finally waking up to the truth about McCain and how he has abandoned his bipartisan roots, shamelessly vying for support from the ultra-conservatives in his party.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -12/+13How has he "abandoned his bipartisan roots?" Wasn't he recently part of the "gang of 14" and isn't he still a frequent co-sponsor of democrat-proposed legislation?
    • CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6@nixonrichard

      If you repeat the same thing over and over, eventually others will start repeating it and it will pick up steam. Take, for example, the idea that 600,000 civilians were killed in Iraq. That has been clearly disproven and yet people still repeat so others will repeat it and the "fact" continues on. That's what they're trying to do to McCain now - facts be damned.
    • unknownsoldierX, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21@CorpT

      "If you repeat the same thing over and over, eventually others will start repeating it and it will pick up steam"

      ....like how Bush still, to this day, connects Iraq to 9/11 in many of his speeches?
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4"....like how Bush still, to this day, connects Iraq to 9/11 in many of his speeches?"

      Kind of like how Al-Queda is fighting in Iraq too....and maybe how other terrorists are fueling the fire......hmm......terrorsts were involved in 9/11, and now terrorists are involved in helping to make the situation in Iraq worse....yeah....no connection there..... He's already stated Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Do you always vomit what you're told?
    • keefaaron, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Here is my question.....

      How come there wasn't more of a fuss from the liberal community because of the events leading up to the College Football National Championship?

      For those of you who weren't watching the game....

      1) The Game is on FOX
      2) GOP Candidate Mccain does the Coin Toss
      3) An American Flag covers the entire field
      4) Soldiers sing the National Anthem

      The Abundance of Nationalism and the glorification of a political figure reminds me of sporting events in another country in another era.
    • unknownsoldierX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@TubaTechno

      "Kind of like how Al-Queda is fighting in Iraq too....and maybe how other terrorists are fueling the fire......hmm......terrorsts were involved in 9/11, and now terrorists are involved in helping to make the situation in Iraq worse....yeah....no connection there..... He's already stated Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Do you always vomit what you're told?"

      The majority of the terrorists in Iraq are not Al-Queda. They are from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and what's left of the Baath party. The terrorists vying for control in Iraq are not the same terrorists that attacked us on 9/11. Yet, 9/11 is still commonly mentioned when Bush is talking about "winning the war on terror" and "punishing those that attacked us."

      How about you do what the Bush administration should have done BEFORE the war. Research the region and what is going on there. Look up "Sunnis", "Shi'ites", "Sufis", "Sufis", and "Wahhabis".

      Then, maybe you'll understand how wrong Bush's strategy is.


      "Do you always vomit what you're told?"

      Vomit? No. Purge, but only after I'm fed a bunch of *****. You should try it. Do some research after you listen to your flawless, faultless leader.
  • apothekari, on 10/12/2007, -12/+29Yeah...I used to say "Hey Mccain's alright he's a conservative I might actually vote for."
    WTF has happened to him in the last 2 years?!?!?
    It's like he saw how successful Bush an Co were in 2001-04 and went "Gotta hop on that train"
    Now that they've been shown to be almost uniformly incompotarded he's stuck defending them.
    Damn John...Pull up before its too late.
    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10He will probably enlist Karl Rove for help. Nothing like good ol' fashioned fear mongering to rally an apathetic nation.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -8/+4No, it has nothing to do with his ACTUAL policies, it has EVERYTHING to do with how the media portrays him. Nothing has changed about John McCain except for the media's opinion of him. Especially given Barak Obama's recent announcement.

      The media is completely full of *****. You're smart enough to know that.
  • FlaG8r, on 10/12/2007, -9/+30McCain is, by far, the biggest phony on Capitol Hill.
    • lacronicus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4well, i guess your right, but here i though it was bush. although, he isnt phony about anything. hell come out and say hes an idiot.
  • llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -14/+8McCain = Bush 2.0 we don't need another thanks. What we could really use in 2008 is Lincoln 2.0 ... Clinton was Kennedy 2.0.
    • LadyBeGood, on 10/12/2007, -24/+4"Clinton was Kennedy 2.0"

      LOL!!! I guess he was, except Kennedy only had 1000 days to achieve nothing. Slick Willy took a whole eight years to acheive absolutely nothing.
    • osirisothedead, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22@LadyBeGood

      Yeah, right.

      http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm

      Plenty of info there on Clinton's accomplishments. Perhaps by "achievement" you mean he didn't get us in to a quagmire with a sovereign nation, thereby killing over 3,000 Americans and tens of thousands of civilians, but that's the kind of achievement we can do without, I think.
    • grandpajesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Perhaps by "achievement" you mean he didn't get us in to a quagmire with a sovereign nation, thereby killing over 3,000 Americans and tens of thousands of civilians"

      yes, that is what lady meant
  • LadyBeGood, on 10/12/2007, -22/+6Wow, the Dems must be scared ***** that Hero McCain is running.

    McCain will wipe the floor with that screeching harpy, Shrillery.
    • amoirae, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Lady, be quiet and let the grown ups talk.
  • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -18/+16Liberal mud slinging already beginning on Digg for 2008.
    • reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10From the article:

      "In past efforts to pander to a far right base that doesn't trust him, McCain campaigned in Alabama for George Wallace Jr., a popular speaker at a white supremacist hate group, continues to employ a strategist who denounced the creation of a Federal holiday honoring Dr. King as "vicious" and "profane," and even hired the man responsible for the racist ads against Harold Ford in the Senate race in Tennessee in 2006."

      That white supremacist hate group: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Conservative_Citizens

    • LadyBeGood, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9I wouldn't call it mud-slinging. They are simply terrified because Hillary is their nominee and she will lose. Most Americans want divided government anyway, after six years of Republican mismanagement.
    • wqwert, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"They are simply terrified because Hillary is their nominee..."

      Obama is getting my vote!
    • 5hop4orce, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Wow, that's a really objective and two-sided article. Wikipedia is totally non-biased!
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2"Obama is getting my vote!"

      You might want to check his record....he's done basically nothing that qualifies him for president...
  • reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Racists in Alabama? That's not possible!

    /sarcasm

    Btw, I do live in Birmingham, AL and yeah it does seem as if Bob Riley's membership at the lodge excludes blacks. I found this while searching for more info: http://alabamagrandlodgefacts.blogspot.com/
    • David513, on 10/12/2007, -8/+8There are racists EVERYWHERE. You're pretty stupid to play up stereotypes that are no more true of Birmingham than Detroit or Boston or LA. As for the substance of the case, it's pretty weak, for the following reasons:

      1) The Alabama governor (Riley) is a member of a Masonic Lodge, not some racist group. There have been different Masonic groups in some places for blacks and whites, and that is the way BOTH groups want it. The black group has no desire to be integrated into the other group, according to a story about this issue months ago in a Birmingham newspaper. (Personally, I think the Masons are pretty weird, but that's true wherever they are and whatever their skin color is.)

      2) It's highly unlikely to McCain could possibly have known that Riley was a Mason, much less the structure or membership of the local Masonic Lodge.

      3) McCain attending the swearing in of a governor from his own party is obviously to boost his chances of getting that governor's support in the coming presidential primaries. It has NOTHING to do with approving or disapproving of organizations the guy belongs to.

      4) Riley tried to force the largest tax hike in state history on Alabama when he was first elected four years ago -- and is greatly reviled by most conservatives in the state.

      I don't care for McCain OR Riley. (I'm a libertarian, so I don't agree with either of them about much of anything.) But it's important to be fair and accurate. The DNC is completely out of line in this case.

      David
    • syncomm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3In Ohio at least, there are more African-American Freemasons than all other races. Of note for Freemasonry in general, Colin Powell and Kweisi Mfume (former president of NAACP) are two well known examples of prominent African-American masons today. It is perhaps one of the most inclusive groups in history -- containing members of every religion, race, and orientation. Speaking as a Democrat and Freemason, I find this a very inaccurate jab the the fraternity.
  • ForlornHope, on 10/12/2007, -15/+14An organization that discriminates based on race?? Surely he means the NAACP or perhaps universities. OH, wait, those are the good kinds of racism. Never mind.
    • grandpajesus, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6srsly, after all 35 years of "equality" is enough justice
    • LadyBeGood, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11It's only discrimination if you're a person of colour. When whites are discriminated against, it's "social justice."
    • reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10What does the NAACP have to do with McCain supporting a white supremacist?

      Racism is wrong no matter what.
    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4"srsly, after all 35 years of "equality" is enough justice"

      Yeah, lets punish innocent people who were not even alive 35 years ago for the sins of others, instead of treating people as individuals.

      I don't think you understand what either equality or justice means.
    • grandpajesus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2yeah, innocent...
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8"What does the NAACP have to do with McCain supporting a white supremacist?"

      He is only a "white supremacist" because he belongs to an organization that excludes blacks. This is like saying that if you work on a navy submarine you are a misogynist because they exclude women, or if you donate to the NAACP college fund you are a racist because they exclude white people.

      The DNC is trying to put the word "white supremacist" as close to the name "John McCain" as they can. John McCain isn't a racist, but they're trying to create that association in people's minds. It's a dirty trick, but it's one used often in politics.
    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"yeah, innocent.."

      Right, an 18 year old college applicant is the source of oppression in the US, so lets punish him/her. It's racist to lump members of an ethnic group together and then punish them all because of what some of them have done.
  • Oblongintellect, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8There's no need for liberal mud slinging, I think that there is about a 0% chance that we have a republican president elected in 2008. The amount of damage caused by GWB will probably be more than enough to get a democrat into the white house.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6You would think, but the democrat party couldn't even provide a candidate good enough to prevent GWB from being reelected. Also, typically if congress is controlled by one party, the other party has a good chance of winning the presidency.
    • Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3It all comes down to who each party selects. If each party selects candidates on the extreme end of the political spectrum, we'll see more highly polarized elections like the last two, but I'd put my money on the Dems. If one side picks a moderate while the other picks an extremist, the moderate will win.
  • DeadPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11If your party has a member that used to be in the Klan (Senator Byrd) maybe you should STFU on MLK day.
    • reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress

      After 1935 all the black House Of Representatives have been Democrats except for *one*.

    • theodicey, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8That was 60 years ago, Byrd was 23 at the time, and he long ago renounced his racist activities.

      "It [the KKK] has emerged throughout my life to haunt and embarrass me, and has taught me in a very graphic way what one major mistake can do to one's life, career and reputation. I displayed very bad judgment, due to immaturity and a lack of seasoned reasoning." -- Robert Byrd

      http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20050619-1359-byrdbook.html

      Why do Republicans always bring up this canard? Could it be they're embarrassed about racism within their own party?
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Yes, but a lot of those blacks were members of the same party as a Klan member, senator Byrd, so by the same logic as this article about John McCain, they should be assamed of their racist associations.

      Racism knows no party lines and just because you are friends with a racist doesn't mean you are a racist.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"Why do Republicans always bring up this canard?"

      Republicans aren't typically the ones to attack another person/party with accusations of "racism", however, when attacked, they bring up the fact that there is currently a former KKK in the senate . . . and he has a "D" next to his name, not an "R."
    • JAVandiver, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"I wonder if a Republican was a member of the Klan 60 years ago and apologized for it, if he would get forgivness."

      You mean like David Duke? No, they would be laughed out of the RNC. The DNC instead makes apologies. Speaks volumes for the tolerance for racism IMO.
    • GenericName, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4David Duke is still an unapologetic racist.
  • grandpajesus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Geekee
    do you live in the perfect american where the hundreds of years of racism before hand has been wiped out in one generation?
    do you mean to tell me that there are no racist whites anymore?
    do you mean to tell me that white people dont have the advantage in the USA anymore?
    if so, awesome, you win.
    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"do you mean to tell me that white people dont have the advantage in the USA anymore?"

      Who's got a bigger advantage, the son of a wealthy black lawyer, or the son of a single white mother on welfare? Economics plays a far bigger role than race in giving someone an advantage today in the US. I'd much rather see "affirmative action" based on economic status than on skin color. That way, disadvantaged children of all races will get some help.
    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3logical fallacies committed by parent:
      straw man
      false dilemma
    • GenericName, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1geekee, you ain't gonna make many friends on your side talkin' that commie *****. Don't you realize Stalin killed over 5 trillion people and you wanna go and do something like that? That's the road to tyranny, my friend.
  • LadyBeGood, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8Senator Byrd? Isn't he the Democrat from West Virginia who enjoyed lynching black people in his younger days?
    • xGORDOx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Yup - he was in the KKK
      It's ok though - he's a Democrat therefore couldn't possibly (rolls eyes) be a racist.
    • GenericName, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5No, I think we woulda heard about it if he ever lynched anyone.

      Hey, the neocons were socialists in their youth and you forgave them. Why can't we forgive a repentant conservative?
  • FrugalFreak, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3This story is propaganda, as an Alabamian, I did not vote for Riley, and I am not a member of the masons. The story is being perpetrated because local Leaders such as Alvin Holmes cried afoul because the inaugural celebrations did not promote the MLK holiday as they saw fit. My opinion is being that they expected a MLK celebration equal to that of the inaugural celebrations. That wasn't going to happen. they therefore took bits of info and pieced together a story that seems more than what it was. they had johnnie carr speak of MLK ininaugural in the
    address.
  • ptFoe, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Its a shame the Congs didn't finish this pathetic ass.
  • 5hop4orce, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1I don't think MLK day should be a federal holiday. I don't think we should even have federal holidays.
    • ptFoe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I don't think you should be allowed to breathe.
    • lacronicus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2this man speaks the truth! we do not have presidents day off, chris columbus day, or even ELECTION DAY off, yet he gets a day? thats not right, and im not sure what it is if its not racism. he helped less than 30% of the american public, yet is praised as one of the greatest heroes in US history, greater than lincoln even. sure he did many good things, but he is not as great as many make him out to be.
  • ptsd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3no one remember McCain from the Keating Five? the big Savings and Loan scandal??
  • DrunkChimp, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2MacCane has been licking GWs ass since 2000 elections. Don't expect him to stop know, especially since he wants to be President - he'll lick any ass is there's a payoff. Asslicking POW S.O.B.
    • lacronicus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2while you do present yourself as a fool, i will admit that this is something that many people have done. but to kiss GW's ass? last i heard, he lost a virginia rep her office. by supporting her. i know i wouldnt want his help.
  • bryanedds, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Because MLK was a big-government socialist who wanted to give the Federal government the power to involve itself with the private lives of ever more citizens, McCain should have know he's supposed to pander to the far left on MLK day, not to the far right.

    Lesson learned, I s'pose.
  • efriese, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Since when does not having black members mean you're racist? I belong to many groups that don't have black members, but it's not because we're racist...it's because none have asked to join. It's ***** like this that makes people not want to vote.
  • p51d007, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Personally, I would rather see ALL current politicians, no matter WHICH party, FIRED, and they put it back the
    way it was INTENDED to be. The house of representatives (known back then as the "peoples house") were elected
    by the entire population, as they do now. The STATE LEGISLATURES were in charge of "electing" the senators.
    Plus, I would put a two term maximum on ANY politician. If it is good enough for the President of the United States,
    then why isn't it good enough for the House & Senate?
    The problem, among other things, is that we have politicians in DC now, who have been there almost their entire adult
    life! The job of congress was NEVER EVER intended to be "a lifetime job". The founders intended (if you read some of their writings, such as the federalist papers) was that a common man accept the job for a few years, then go back to his REGULAR job and let someone else run for office.
    We need to break the cycle of "professional politicians", which would at least get some new ideas.
    The other thing I would do is nuke the entire K street lobbyist. I don't care how pure and clean as the wind driven
    snow you are, if you have been in DC for over a year, the K streeters have their hooks into you one way or another.
    Take any disgraced politician and if you could get them to be totally honest (maybe some truth serum) they would
    tell you they never intended to become corrupt. Through enough money, power etc in front of anyone and I bet
    75% would take it. Unfortunately, it's human nature, for the most part.
  • kingygk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Sadly MCcain will be the reason why Hillary wins in 08. We are doomed.
  • yoshitx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Sounds like the Dems want to take out JM early.....
  • NotEvenClose, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wow. The Dems are afraid of McCain in a big way if they are resorting to these lowball tactics.
  • analyze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You know what DNC means? Don't, No, Can't!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.