January 17, 2003
WE SHALL OVERCOME!:
Let's Get Ready to Rumble!: Al Sharpton gears up to take on the Dems. (Garance Franke-Ruta, February 1, 2003, American Prospect)The subject this weekend in late December: how the current retrenchment on civil-rights issues is leading to the end of America's second Reconstruction, which, says Sharpton, ran from 1965 to 1988, when it reached its pinnacle with the Rev. Jesse Jackson's second run for the presidency. But although Sharpton mentions deposed Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and newly installed Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) -- who Sharpton says has agreed to a sit-down talk on
race relations -- the reverend is oddly silent on the subject of President George W. Bush. Instead, he saves most of his considerable ire for the Democratic Party and his bete blanche, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC)."They don't call themselves the Dixiecrats now, they call themselves the DLC, the Democratic Leadership Council," he thunders to his largely gray-haired audience of about 100. "Our fathers had to fight Jim Crow. We got to fight his son, James Crow, Esq. Speaks a little better, dresses a little nicer, got a little more education. But it's the same agenda. We're not looking for better slave masters -- we're looking for freedom!" The audience members nod their heads in agreement and murmur assent. The accusation that the DLC is the second coming of the Dixiecrats was widely made by Jackson beginning in 1985, but in the immediate wake of the Lott scandal, calling someone a Dixiecrat has acquired new weight, resonance -- and power.
Power is what Sharpton is after, and he's not afraid to admit it. He wants a seat at the national Democratic Party table. He wants to sit among the decision makers, allocating funds, plotting policy, bringing along a contingent of his own. It's one of the reasons he abandoned the jogging suits and gold medallions he wore for so many years. It's why he breakfasts regularly at the posh Regency Hotel in Manhattan, where he can hobnob with the rich and powerful and have chance encounters with other presidential contenders, such as Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.). And it's why he hopscotches the globe and keeps shots of himself with such internationally known figures as Cuban President Fidel Castro and U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell on prominent display in his office.
Ever attentive to symbolism, Sharpton decided to file papers with the Federal Election Commission announcing his presidential exploratory committee on Jan. 21, the day after Martin Luther King Jr. Day. He won't formally declare his candidacy until sometime later this year. But for more than a year now he has crisscrossed America, giving stump speeches at churches and universities (two of his expected bases of support) and getting the lay of the land in visits to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina (the first three states to hold presidential primaries and caucuses). Sharpton's platform, still incomplete, is a traditionally left-liberal one of the sort that's rarely seen on the national stage these days but commonly espoused within the confines of New York City. He's adopted a modified version of unsuccessful 2002 New York Democratic gubernatorial candidate H. Carl McCall's reinvestment platform, calling for $250 billion in federal and pension funds to be poured into roads, bridges, schools and other
infrastructure projects. He's strongly opposed to the death penalty, racial profiling, war in Iraq and any kind of unilateral U.S. intervention abroad. He's pro-choice, pro-welfare and pro-affirmative action, and he also supports gay rights.October saw the publication of Sharpton's second book, Al on America (co-written with Karen Hunter), in which he declared, "I am running for president to finally put the issues concerning most Americans onto the front burner." But, he wrote, "More than a matter of policy, this run for the president is a matter of identity." It's a tough formula to follow: Sharpton is trying to combine populism with an identity politics that has often proven divisive.
If no one like Dennis Kucinich runs, no true "progressive", then where else does the Left have to go but the Rev. And if he's at the debates raising issues like abortion, gay rights, and affirmative action, all the other guys have to make the right noises. To a degree which must give Terry McAuliffe nightmares, Al Sharpton has a chance to shape this campaign. Posted by Stephen Judd at January 17, 2003 10:50 AM
All I know is, come debate time in the primaries, I'm driving the hour(+) round trip it takes to get a couple of pizzas, and settling in for the show.
I can't figure out if this is like '84 or '88 all over again, or some wonderful amalgam of the two.
I want to hear how the DLC is like the Dixiecrats. I can't imagine what the argument would be, but I'd love to see Democrats debating the question.
Posted by: pj at January 17, 2003 11:55 AMReminds me, a little, of 1968. I went with a friend to a
Wallace rally, where the warmup was a gal duo called (really!) Mona and Lisa.
About 10K people showed up, and it was held at a
football stadium instead of a community center with
chairs for 150. My favorite memory: a girl, perhaps 16, swooning "Thank God for George Wallace!"
But it didn't mean a thing. Just the wonderful hucksterism and showmanship and silliness that makes
life in America more fun than in, say, China.
Is it true, by the way, that Al invented Kwaanzaa when
he was 16? I read that somewhere but can't recall where.
AUTHOR: Annoying Old Guy
EMAIL: aog@thought-mesh.net
IP:
URL: http://blog.thought-mesh.net
DATE: 01/17/2003 01:25:00 PM
AUTHOR: Annoying Old Guy
EMAIL: aog@thought-mesh.net
URL: http://blog.thought-mesh.net
DATE: 1/17/2003 01:25:00 PM
Stephen:
You are doing an admirable job, but what happened to OJ? Did Ruffini win an election somewhere?
Carol Mosely Braun
is also expected to make a run for the Democratic nomination.
For all their supposed concern for the "little guy," the Democrats have designed their nominating process so that the party's movers and shakers ("superdelegates") have effective veto power over the eventual nominee. Wonder how it will go over with Black voters and progressive activists to see the superdelegates actively working to defeat Rev. Al and Carol Braun so they can make some blow-dried white guy the nominee?
Buttercup,
Orrin is off for a couple of days. He gave me some morsels to dole out in his absence.
Having "The Rev" seriously make a run for the presidency scares the bejeezus out me. As a young black man, I have no doubt that this will end up casting an ugly shadow on future black politicians among the democrats, if not both parties. Sharptons little "Dixiecrat" comment betrays his intentions should the democrats decide to pass on him; a decision I would agree with personally. I've no doubt he'll cause a huge ruckus and ,reprising our role of "oppressed minority," most of the black constituency will fall in line behind him in blind support. It'll be a bad PR for the Dems- hell, it might just work in the GOP's favor. The truly sad part of this is, but for the fact that I know this joker's history and politics, I'd almost be inclined to vote for him...almost. I'm pro-choice (not pro-abortion), and for gay rights, but I'm also hawksih on national security, against affirmative action, and for the protection of gun ownership rights, among other more conservative viewpoints. Where the hell do I belong?
Posted by: T-Dub at January 17, 2003 5:20 PMT-Dub - where do you belong? In the Republican party! Lots of Republicans fit your ideological profile.
Don't worry about Sharpton McKinney et al., no one's going to generalize about black Americans from those characters. Sharpton in the end may even help moderate black pols, people will be eager to encourage blacks by helping moderate pols like Harold Ford Jr. succeed.
pj:
if blacks continue to vote 90%+ for Democrats, in what sense are Sharpton and
...cKinney outside of the mainstream of black politics?
Posted by: oj at January 18, 2003 12:12 PMWell, one reason might be that Sharpton
has never held elective office and that
McKinney was unable to accomplish the
easiest feat in electoral politics, reelection
to Congress.
Just the thought of Lieberman vs. Sharpton must have the Dems in despair.
Posted by: Thom at January 18, 2003 4:44 PMAfter discussing this topic with several people, I've com to the conclusion that we can expect to see a big push in electoral politics from Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al. Why, because it's crunch time for these relics of the civil rights era. They desperately need to capitalize on the nostalgia of the older black community and the poor and uninformed because, frankly, their a joke among the youngsters - like myself. Their willingness to play the race card on any issue has drained them of all credibility with the younger generation who don't see race as much of an issue, thank god.
Posted by: T-Dub at January 19, 2003 8:21 AMoj - Al Sharpton's support among blacks is 12%.
Posted by: pj at January 19, 2003 8:36 AMpj:
What Democrats are higher? And where is that support? He's already won statewide nomination in NY, which tends to be a state that matters in the Democrat primaries. If Graham, Edwards, and Gephardt are all in the race when it goes South they'll tend to divvy up the "Southern" vote; if Sharpton can just peel off a chunk of the black vote he can do as well as anyone. Remember, it's not about winning, but about becoming a player. And when he says he got x number of votes in the primaries and deserves to speak at the convention, sopmeone's going to say "no".
Harry:
Sharpton was the Democrat candidate for Senate in NY, a real state.
McKinney lost a primary to another black candidate because Jews made her a target and Republicans were able to vote against her. This is a source of much tension in the Democrat Party, which is the point.
OJ-Sharpton ran for Senate in '92 and '94, but didn't get the nomination.
As for McKinney, don't forget the Indians.
Sharpton for Vice Preisdent! Hillary for President in 2004! I tremble when I think of the news coverage of this duo in an election, especially when the Left starts their rant about Republican racism, IQs, putting poison in the water, and reducing air levels to those of Mexico City. I'd like to nominate Jesse but I don't think anyone finds him as credible as Waters or McKinley.
Posted by: TJ Jackson at January 20, 2003 12:44 AMGetting a voice Sharpton can pull off, if he can control himself for a year. But look at these poll numbers from Iowa
: 55% say they don't know who Sharpton is, 32% say they know and would never ever vote for him, 13% say they know and might consider voting for him. Meanwhile, in the popularity poll, Gephardt is at 19%, Lieberman 17%, Kerry 11% (probably benefiting from confusion with the Nebraska Senator), and Sharpton is below 5%. Sharpton may be more prominent than Alan Keyes was in Republican primaries, but not by much.