Not "Hearsay." Blacks pressure black superdelegates to "get on the right side"

[tgnyc]

At least one other thread on this topic here at DU was sprinkled with assertions that such allegations amount to little more than "hearsay."

Here, then are some actual claims from those actually on the receiving end of the behavior in question:

Cleveland City Councilman Kevin Conwell, a onetime supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton, is switching sides to the Obama camp.

It had little to do with Clinton and everything to do with pressure from people who voted him into office.

"I thought that I would never see an African-American going for president of the United States of America. This is a dream and you need to get on the right side of history, and my residents want me to be a part of this dream," Conwell said.

<SNIP>

But other African-American politicians find the shifting loyalties disturbing.


"With all due respect to my colleagues, whoever you are, I firmly believe if you don't have loyalty and integrity, what do you have? ... I am a woman of my word. I will not leave her," said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Neither will California Rep. Diane Watson, though she said she's received not only pressure, but also threatening e-mails.

"We can disagree. But I don't think that's a cause for viciousness and for launching a campaign against me," Watson said.

And finally, there's me. As an African-American who has expressed preference for Clinton, I have been routinely subjected to non-jocular ridicule, bewilderment and dismay from my fellow African-Americans. To them, it is all but physically impossible for one to have black skin and not support the potential first black president. Trust me, this is a very real phenomenon, and it just barely falls short of accusation of being a "race traitor."

And to those who say superdelegates should reflect the preferences of their constituents, I only ask: are there ever times when an elected official should take an action or cast a vote contrary to the preferences his constituency? If so, what disqualifies this decision from being potentially one of those times?

And yes, this race issue issue has been previously aired on this forum in recent days, but I think it's important enough to warrant extended discussion.

So I raise it once again.

What's up?

[Wayjose]

1. What about Bill pressing Richardson?

Here is the former President pressing Bill Richardson to support Hillary "Aren't 2 Cabinet positions enough for you?"

[Wayjose]

2. and I think the word is "Hearsay"

[msmcghee]

7. Did Bill Clinton tell Richardson that he should endorse . .

. . Hillary because of racial solidarity? No, I didn't think so.

A candidate's race is not a reason to vote for them - black, white or brown.

Those who use race to coerce super delegates' votes are engaging in racism.

I thought we liberals were opposed to racism. How quickly we seem to forget principles when there is something to lose or gain. I think I have more respect for racists who don't pretend to be otherwise.

[Wayjose]

10. Bill Clinton wanted to nail the Hispanic vote

and that is why he was pressing on Richardson for an endorsement. Bill is afraid that Hillary's hold of the Hispanic vote is eroding...in Texas she will only get about 54% to Obama's 46% and that is why she will lose TX, in my opinion.

[msmcghee]

12. The op by tgnyc discussed black pressure on black . .

. . super delegates to support Obama because of racial solidarity. tgnyc is pointing out hypocrisy among Dems. That is good as I like to think that we Dems have principles that are not thrown away so easily when there's something to be gained.

Your response missed the op's point entirely - as did your response to my comment.

Thanks for the op and the point tgnyc. :thumbsup:

[Adelante]

3. Kevin Conwell answered to his constituents and rightly so

But at least on Cleveland's east side, Obama's surging grassroots success has stolen Clinton's establishment base right out from under her. Cleveland City Councilman Kevin Conwell came out early for Clinton, winning a trip to the national convention to vote for her.

Then Conwell's constituents sat him down for a little chat. "I met with my residents and tried to get them to go with Hillary," Conwell says. "Not one of them would move. All of my volunteers, all my block club presidents, every last one of them was going for Barack."

Conwell was forced to relinquish his seat at the convention. He spent last Saturday canvassing his ward for Obama.

"Now that I've been with both campaigns, I see that Obama's has a lot more volunteers, and they're all grassroots people from the neighborhood," Conwell says. "I didn't think this movement would grow. I was wrong. It's strong."

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1717150,00.html

[lapfog_1]

4. The super delegates are SUPER delegates because

of the positions they hold, positions that they, for the most part, were elected to by their constituents. The constituents have a right to voice their opinions, even strongly held opinions to their elected officials. The elected official can disregard their opinions if they want... and, if the matter is a strongly held belief by the majority of constituents, they can be removed from office.

[Lucinda]

5. K&R - Thanks for the post!

[HooptieWagon]

6. Pressure to change their support is totally legit

The serious charges being thrown about are "death threats" and name-calling. I am sure that Rep Watson is willing to release the contents of the "threatening emails" in order to substantiate her claim... or not.

[tgnyc]

15. Totally legit, even if it's based on racial solidarity?

[HooptieWagon]

25. Who am I to judge?

If AA constituants want to support an AA candidate, that's their perogative. Just as many women support Hillary b/c she's a viable woman candidate. Good for them. The SDs, the vast majority of whom having been elected in some manner or another, are representing those who've elected them, and those people have every right to pressure the SDs if they're perceived as being on the wrong side of an issue. Death threats and name-calling, of course, are taking things too far... but those allegations still haven't been substantiated. Go ahead, post the emails, post the recordings, name the guilty parties, prove me wrong.

[jasmine621]

8. Jesse Jackson and Sharpton ran for President. Were they on the right side

of history? Shirley Chisholm ran in the 70's...she was smarter, more dedicated, and more experienced than Obama right now. Was she on the right side of history. Anyone who says race is not an issue needs to talk to all the blacks who are voting on racial lines alone.

[cali]

9. I think you're blowing this out of proportion for your own obvious

purposes. There is nothing wrong with citizens advocating to their elected reps. Yes, it should stop well short of vile accusations and threats, but Clinton endorsers keep making these accusations and NOT providing the evidence in the form of the emails they say are threatening. I'm not saying I don't believe that their have been some theats, but it's sick to imply that this is representative of the Obama campaign or Obama supporters.

Ad for SDs they have every right to support whoever they wish, and citizens have every right to get them to endorse the candidate that they favor.

[tgnyc]

13. But it is representative of Obama's black supporters.

[Kahuna]

48. Got any proof? You should not be making these allegations without proof. nt

[msmcghee]

16. Pointing out racism is not . .

. . "blowing things out of proportion". There is no amount of racism that is acceptable - or "proportionately acceptable".

Or - if you think that's wrong, then just how much racism is OK by you? Where do you draw that line? Is the line where your candidate benefits but not the other?

[sniffa]

19. Wow

Now that my initial bewilderment has subsided. :eyes: :rofl:

[cali]

20. Ugh. This is NOT about racism

and it says a lot about you that you're trying to twist it in that way. Clinton's campaign pressures women to vote for her because of her gender- Gloria Steinem's done it and so have many others. Is that sexism? pffft.

[tgnyc]

21. yes it is.

[yardwork]

32. It's kind of sad seeing an Anglo poster attacking a Black poster for discussing this issue.

I'm just shaking my head in disbelief, actually. If I were you, I would totally ignore anyone ignorant enough to think that they - from their Anglo perspective - know better than you what is and isn't racist.

[msmcghee]

22. HRC has specifically stated that . .

. . it would be wonderful if a woman was elected president of the US. Also that it would be wonderful if a black person was elected to that position . . because of the message of possibilities it would send to black and female children.

In the next sentence she stated that being black or female is not a valid reason to vote for someone. I agree with HRC on this.

The op was pointing out that black super delegates are being pressured to vote for O because of racial solidarity. That is wrong. That is racism. Spin it as you wish.

[msmcghee]

26. BTW - if Gloria Stenhem actually said . .

. . that HRC should be elected because she's a woman then that would be sexism. Didn't want you to think that I was avoiding your question.

I'm sure there are many Dems who will choose sides based on sexism or racism - and who already have. That's wrong IMO and violates liberal principles of unbiased fairness.

But, did GS really say that? I'm not disputing you but do you have a link? I'm curious.

[yardwork]

34. Are you Black? I had the impression that you are Anglo.

If you're Anglo, why do you think you are in a position to tell this Black poster what is and isn't racist?

Whoa. Step back for a minute.

[msmcghee]

37. Why would you think that . .

. . a black poster has an inside angle on racism that white posters don't?

There are black and white racists and anybody - regardless of skin color - can see racism if they open their eyes. Being a victim of bigotry doesn't make anyone smarter or more enlightened than anyone else.

There's plenty of bigotry out there. Thinking that blacks or Jews or any other discriminated against minority can not be bigots for some reason is plain stupid.

[Evergreen Emerald]

11. The reason there are no "facts?" Where is the media? This is a huge story

More proof of media bias.

[Bad Thoughts]

14. I wrote post on Emanuel Cleaver

... concerning his appearance on Friday. My focus was not on whether African American politicians were receiving pressure, some threatening, but how they responded thereto. Cleaver insinuated that Lewis changed his support because of said threats. He could not back up the claim, even via hearsay, and I found his claim preposterous on its face : Lewis has simply been too courageous in his life to be cowed.

I can't excuse those people who make threats. That goes too far. However, I can understand those people who want their representatives to reflect the ethnicity of their constituents. Women had more than eight years to prepare for Clinton to run. I, a Mexican-American, at least waited for Richardson to say the right things to win me over (he dropped out before my state's primary). The prevailing sense has been that both politicians would run for the presidency. I doubt that the African-American community had considered the possibility of a candidate with broad appeal emerging from their ranks. It's only been in the last few months that a sense that "Obama could win" has taken hold.

Now, the superdelegates may pick as they will. Obviously, they will have to explain their decisions to their constituents. That's politics. May some lose in elections because of it, being seen as "Uncle Toms"? Yes, but that's politics. Among those things that make and break politicians is the "company they keep", and backlash is a reality. If the superdelegates want to vote opposite their constituents, that is the strength of their convictions, but they should realize that their constitutes will judge them as they act as representatives.

[indimuse]

17. Lo_bama at itagain! The ruin of our party! This is the lowest yet!!

Neither will California Rep. Diane Watson, though she said she's received not only pressure, but also threatening e-mails.

"We can disagree. But I don't think that's a cause for viciousness and for launching a campaign against me," Watson said.


Can't you Obma supporter open your eyes...? THe ObamaCON is OVER!

[HooptieWagon]

23. Care to post the emails?

I thought not...

[msmcghee]

24. Not necessary . . straw man.

How about you explain why you think people like Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones who describes this pressure they are receiving are lying and making this up. I watched her interview and I have no reason to believe she was lying.

[HooptieWagon]

27. Where did she say that?

""With all due respect to my colleagues, whoever you are, I firmly believe if you don't have loyalty and integrity, what do you have? ... I am a woman of my word. I will not leave her," said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones.
"

I see no reference to her receiving threats in her statement. Care to provide a link?

[msmcghee]

28. I watched the whole interview.

Don't have a transcript.

[HooptieWagon]

42. "Don't have a transcript."

Color me surprised... or not.

[msmcghee]

45. Hey, if you want to believe that black SD's are not . .

. . being called "Uncle Toms" and traitors to their race for not supporting O - go for it.

I don't have any need to convince you of anything. But I think the evidence from black SD's who describe that pressure is available to those who don't have an agenda for disbelieving it.

BTW - I have nothing against O as a person or a candidate. I prefer C because of her experience dealing with vicious repubs for 15 years and winning those conflicts - and for her political and ethical smarts and proven support over many years for liberal values. I haven't seen O's smarts on display yet although I did see a lot of mushy appeals to "movement" (read tribal) emotions. (BTW - my use of "tribal" has nothing to do with race in this sentence. It simply means "mob mentality".)

My position in this thread is not based on my preference for president. It's based on my disgust at seeing my liberal (non-racist, fairness) values cast aside so easily and spurious charges of racism spewed against good and honest Dems for short term political advantage.

That's not only dishonest but it is terribly damaging to long-term Dem interests. It also turns Dem against Dem. What the fuck is wrong with people that they so easily resort to vile hate tactics against other Dems? Maybe I need to be an Independent.

[Kahuna]

49. If she were my rep, she'd get an earful from me too. She is not sent

to DC to "represent" herself or her "friend" Hillary. :eyes:

[chyjo]

18. So in places

Where the polls have tilted to Obama to the tune of over 80 percent have constituents pressuring their superdelegates to back Barack Obama? That is truly shocking. I find the word threatening to be very suspect until we actually see these emails. Is saying that they will face a primary challenger next election cycle really a threat? If you take a position that is at odds with huge majorities of your constituents you probably are more likely to face a serious primary challenger? That is not a threat, that is politics. That is why Ned Lamont beat Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Dem primary.

Incumbents should remain incumbents forever? Sound logic...........

[Kahuna]

50. We'll by "threat" they mean, threatening to support a challenger.

THAT is what congresscritters consider a "threat." :scared:

[goclark]

29. I'm African American and I believe they have felt the pressure

Yes they have ~ just like politicians have felt pressure for hundreds of years. If you don't do what your voters want, they have the power to kick you out of office.

African Americans have voted in huge numbers to support the Democratic party. Our voices and our votes have been denied for so many years.

Now,some of the people(Watson,Tubbs etc.) that we have given our money to time and time again are saying ~ "We don't care what you want, we don't care if you voted us in time and time again ~ we will not listen to you now!"

" We don't care about what you think."
"We know more than you about who to support, we want Hillary because she was nice to us."

Well, guess what ~ most of these "old timers" that have had a free ride in our community think that they are the Masters and we will continue to do what ever they tell us to do.

Barack was merely the voice that is helping our community to see the political process clearly now ~

It ain't gonna work this time. There are so many talented young political voices that have the energy to LEAD and yet we have continued to vote for the same old people.

They have been put on noticed in the community that they can support Hillary if they want to but there is another part to the picture.
No more free ride for you, we have new candidates that will run against you in the next election.

That is what they are feeling the pressure about ~ Their next election and their next free ride.

Yes! John Lewis, love him dearly, but the pressure that he felt was the message that he would not be running alone next time!

*I must add that I attended the Obama Rally in Los Angeles. It was magnificent! There were so many people there - every color, every age,every economic level.

There was only one African American politician that spoke that day~a name you will need to remember because she was just elected as Speaker of the House in California---- KAREN BASS! :bounce:

She is the NEW voice of California politics and she is dynamic!

[HooptieWagon]

30. very eloquently said

time for a change...

[msmcghee]

35. You're not being very clear.

Are you saying that it's it's good to support (or not support) a candidate because of their color?

If you are that's racism.

Are you saying that Watson, Tubbs etc. are racists for not supporting Obama?

Tubbs didn't say she was sticking with Clinton because of her white color. She said the opposite of that - that she thought Clinton was the better candidate and that she is loyal to her friends. Neither of those reasons has anything to do with race.

There sure seems to be a lot of people implying that opposition to O is racism - without any logical basis for that statement.

Playing the "race card" is a particularly ugly form of racism IMO.

Maybe I misread your post - but if you have a position and you believe in it you should state it clearly and then people won't have to guess about your intentions.

[goclark]

36. You not only misread ~ I was clear

It is not about race and it is not about OBAMA.

Just insert the word EDWARDS in place of OBAMA and the message would be the same.

I loved Edwards and would have voted for him in a heart beat.

You know exactly what I meant.

[msmcghee]

38. You said . .

"African Americans have voted in huge numbers to support the Democratic party. Our voices and our votes have been denied for so many years."

This is the usual trope we hear every election season about how Dem politicians including black Dem politicians take the AA community and their votes for granted.

That's a blatant racist appeal and is used that way by AA candidates and their supporters to arouse racist emotions in other black voters and some progressive non-black voters. i.e. it's using racism to win elections for their preferred candidates - just as HRC was unjustly smeared with racism charges a few weeks ago by those preferring Obama - and those appeals to racism are what allowed Obama to swing the momentum away from HRC. I think all forms of racism are disgusting.

Like I said, if you had a position worthy of consideration you'd explain it clearly and not imply racism in those who you oppose for election in every sentence.

[goclark]

39. I have no reason to appeal to anyone

End of our discussion ~ your eyes are Wide Shut and you want them to be.

[msmcghee]

40. Yeah, I didn't think you'd want to defend yourself further. n/t

[HooptieWagon]

44. What you're completely blind to

is perhaps a minority (or woman) voter supports a minority(woman) candidate b/c they "know" their issues. Or maybe they have other reasons to support their candidate. WTF, who appointed you king to decide who people have to support? Only in the circular clinton logic are blacks supporting a black candidate called racist... Gimmie a fuckin' break. People can support and campaign for whoever they fuckin' want for whatever reason, and they don't have to answer to you.

[msmcghee]

46. Sure they can. And . .

. . if they use racism as a means to support their candidate I'll call them on it.

[Kahuna]

53. Lots of white women are supporting Hillary because..well..

Hillary is a white woman. What do you have to say about them?

[msmcghee]

55. That's sexism if it's the deciding factor. n/t

[Kahuna]

60. You know it's true. Hillary sends that message loud and clear at every

opportunity that white women should vote for her to make history. She's done it several times while sitting right next to Obama and several times at campaign stops. But you don't appear to have a problem with that. I wonder why. Hmmm. x(

[msmcghee]

62. She has not. She's said the opposite.

That while it would be wonderful to have a woman or black president because of the message about inclusion and tolerance that would send . . that's not why someone should vote for them.

Let's see a link that shows otherwise.

[Kahuna]

66. Oh dear. You select one contradictory statement out of several she has made

saying how wonderful it would be to have a woman in the whitehouse. If you haven't heard her say that, you haven't been paying attention. If you hven't been paying attention, you should pipe down and watch all of the debates and rallies. I can't watch them for you.

[msmcghee]

67. Riiiight! Didn't think you'd have a link. You'd think that . .

. . if it's true that, "Hillary sends that message loud and clear at every opportunity that white women should vote for her to make history." as you say . .

. . that it wouldn't be that hard to find one example. Strange, isn't it?

[Kahuna]

68. Don't ever dare me... Maybe you didn't WATCH these debates but..

Here are just two instance out of many where Hillary evoked the, "vote for me because I'm a woman," card. Below is just two. Since you said there were NONE, I really only needed to post one. But here are TWO. A google will yield you more results.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/31/dem.debate.transcript/
snip..

What I think is exciting is that the way we are looking at the Democratic field, now down to the two of us is, is we're going to get big change. We're going to have change. I think having the first woman president would be a huge change for America and the world.


http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=252210
snip..

Her campaign, she explained to Brown, is about making history by breaking the "highest and hardest glass ceiling."

On edit:

Whoops!! I my spare time I found another from just a few days ago at a campaign stop.. The website is faux news. But the source is the Associated Press. I guess that makes it legitimate.

"I am thrilled to be running to be the first woman president, which I think would be a sea change in our country and around the world," the New York senator said this week in Cleveland, emphasizing anew the pioneering aspect of her candidacy.

A woman in the White House, Clinton said, would present "a real challenge to the way things have been done, and who gets to do them and what the rules are."

The remarks had a call-to-action flair and underscored just how much she is relying on women, always a key part of her support, to help her win Ohio and, perhaps, Texas on Tuesday as she seeks to get back on track in the Democratic nomination fight.


http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb29/0,4670,ClintonWomen,00.html

[tgnyc]

69. There's a difference between the candidate saying: vote for me because

I'm X, and therefore have a unique perspective on the job, and a voter saying: you should vote for him because you and he and I are all Y.

[Kahuna]

70. Nonsense. Since she knows that she has lost the black female vote,

she is appealing to white women and latinos. Everybody in the whole wide word knows that. Except maybe you.

[msmcghee]

71. Don't ever dare you?

She said, "I think having the first woman president would be a huge change for America and the world."

How can you possibly read into that sentence a claim by HRC that people should vote for her because she's a woman?

The same goes for, ""I am thrilled to be running to be the first woman president, which I think would be a sea change in our country and around the world," the New York senator said this week in Cleveland, emphasizing anew the pioneering aspect of her candidacy. A woman in the White House, Clinton said, would present "a real challenge to the way things have been done, and who gets to do them and what the rules are."

You said, "Hillary sends that message loud and clear at every opportunity that white women should vote for her to make history."

Both of those are simply statements of fact that if she won it would be an historic first. Also, in neither case was she appealing to women (much less white women) in her statements - either to vote for her or for any other purpose. In neither case does she say that people should vote for her because she's a woman. In fact she has specifically stated previously that neither race nor gender are good reasons to vote for someone.

As I clearly stated before, pointing out the positive aspects of having a black or woman in the white house is not the same as saying people should base their votes on that.

[tgnyc]

72. Not only that, Kahuna, but you completely missed my point. Read it again.

It says there is a difference between what you point out as Hillary's actions and the actions of black Obama voters.

[Kahuna]

75. Okay. I get it. It's okay when it comes directly from your candidates mouth..

but when so so-called anonymous backers, that you don't have one iota of proof for, do it it's TOTALLY DIFFERENT. :crazy: What's wrong with that picture?

[HooptieWagon]

59. well, good luck with your thought police strategy

I'm sure it'll convince people... :eyes:

[msmcghee]

65. I have no need to convince anybody about anything, as I said.

However, I do have a need to point out racism when I see it. It's a personal thing.

[Kahuna]

52. You know exactly what she meant. Nice try though. nt

[Kahuna]

51. Well said, goclark!

:applause:

[goclark]

63. Thanks,

:hug:

[yardwork]

31. I'm Anglo, but I've lived in a town that is majority non-Anglo for a long time.

This question comes up all the time in my town's local politics.

Anyone who reduces a person to the color of their skin or any other single attribute is denying that person's right to be a free, whole person, in my opinion.

Not all Black people think alike. Same goes for Queer people. Latina/o people. Asians. Muslims. Catholics. Protestants. Jews. And so on and on and on.

The Democratic Party is fielding two excellent candidates for president. The Clintons have been strong supporters of African American rights for a long time. There is no need to feel ashamed of supporting Hillary Clinton for president. Some people gave their word to her campaign, and their word means something to them.

I admire them. I salute them. I think it's wrong to attack people on the basis of choosing one Democratic candidate over the other this year.

[ecstatic]

33. the only people who I've seen/heard ridiculed are the ones who say Obama can't win

because he's black. A black person who supports Clinton because they don't believe a black person can be president deserves to be ridiculed, IMO.

[TriMetFan]

41. Thank you so much for your post.

The other day I heard two African-American's on my City Bus say something really stupid to each other. It was "thank God for those stupid white voters that keep on voting for Obama." I was so freaking pissed that when I brought up the racial tone, I was asked if I was not for the brother. Will since I know these 2 people I told them that no I was for the sister. Well that didn't go over will. One of them kept on asking me why I wouldn't vote for the man, since I was part black my-self, I justed laughed even though deep inside I was F*cken Pissed off . So again thank you for your post, because this kind of stuff is happening.

[jlpohio69]

43. Gosh Cleveland City Councilman Kevin Conwell...

kind of sounds like you and your residents are only voting for Obama because he is black...

"I thought that I would never see an African-American going for president of the United States of America. This is a dream and you need to get on the right side of history, and my residents want me to be a part of this dream," Conwell said.

[Kahuna]

47. I think most people (both black and white) understand that representatives..

are sent to Washington to represent their constituents and not themselves.

So you can bleat, whinny and bray all you want and try to make this a racial issue but you will fail because most people really do understand why black constituents would be up in arms if their representatives vote against them. Got it now?

And, oh yeah. The same goes for white representatives. Every representative should vote their district. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :)

[jlpohio69]

54. So by not voting for the African American representative...

one would be on the wrong side of history??? That is pretty much what the story says, which clearly indicates race is a bigger factor that most want to admit. If the constituents want Obama, that's fine, but please vote for him because he is the better candidate, and not because of his skin color...sadly, I don't believe that is what is happening with some within the Africa American community. That's my story, and I am also sticking with it.

[Kahuna]

56. I don't think you see the word "history" in my post. So please don't

try to rearrange my intentions. It won't work. It never does.

[jlpohio69]

57. You need to read the OP...that is what I am quoting

when I talk about being on the wrong side of history. Try again...

[tgnyc]

58. Hey everybody, think of it this way:

Have you heard of female voters in pro-Hillary jurisdictions suggesting that their female SD's who go for Obama aren't "on the right side of history?"

I haven't.

[Cha]

73. They do worse shite.."vote

hilary 'cause she's a woman." But, she'd make a terrible president.

[Cha]

61. They were going with the inevitable one and

now she's not so inevitable anymore. They had no idea so many people would get out and vote for Obama..they could stay with their vote for hilary while their district wants Obama in such high numbers.

And too bad ya'll are voting for a warmonger who has done nothing but smear&jeer politicing this whole campaign but what do you expect when you hire someone expensive like mark penn to do the dirty work?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

64. thank you for your honesty and integrity..standing tall with you!

[TexasBushwhacker]

74. It's the threats that disturb me and ....

the fact that I haven't heard anything from Obama denouncing them. All he has to say is, "I find the idea of threats and intimidation on my behalf abhorent. If a voter prefers Clinton's positions on issues to my positions, they should vote for her. I don't want them to vote for me because they've been threatened." I haven't heard anything like that. He denounced Louis Farrakhan's support as well as his anti-Semitism. Why hasn't he denounced his supporters who have threatened people?

[Kahuna]

76. Threats of non support by voters is a problem for you???? Again..

Those representative were sent to DC to represent their constituents. That's why they're call, representaves. Duh. They were not sent to DC to represent themselves or their friends. It's not really that difficult a concerpt to comprehend. Is it?

If they put their loyalty for their friends above their constituents, the constituents have the right to reconsider their support.

[HooptieWagon]

77. How is he supposed to address rumored threats?

The "threats" are third hand rumors, none of the spreaders of those allegations are able to substantiate them. I thought his comment was fine.

[snooper2]

78. I heard this last week on Rush Fatboy's show...

and on Mr. Fuckface (Hannity) also...

They have been shilling left and right for Hillary, Rush said something to the effect, there is only one source and we don't have any evidence but we are keeping our eyes on this story :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[HeraldSquare212]

79. So that's one politician, and you claim you've been ridiculed.

I'm sure many people - white, balck, Clinton supporter, Obama supporter - have been 'ridiculed' during the course of these primaries.

Even Tubbs-Jones doesn't claim she was 'threatened' and she's been a vocal supporter of Clinton, and the major voice of the Somali smear.