by Teh Nutroots | More on the "racist" back and forth sniping between Clinton and Obama. Where will it all end? It seems pretty evident that the candidates and the whole country need a refresher course in what a racist comment really looks like.
On the King remarks, a controversy blew up after Clinton told Fox News: “Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the president before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done.” (The Politico)
Would Dr. King himself have disagreed with this? Is it necessary for Clinton and other Democrats to pretend that the realization of Dr. King's movement wasn't assisted by Kennedy, Johnson, and the members of Congress who voted for the essential legislation? How is his influence in any way diminished by Clinton's description of the process?
Continue reading "The "Racism" Sniping Needs to Go Away NOW" »
I worry a lot about censorship and access to information, so I've been mulling this over since reading PBS Mind's post last night and I still can't decide which way I lean. I guess I find it hard---no, impossible--- to believe that these providers would have anything to gain, or even think they have anything to gain, by selectively filtering progressive newsletters----and I'd also need to know the stats on conservative ones and on newsletters generally. (Either way the providers to which PBS Mind refers clearly need to do something about their filtering processes and that right speedily.) I don't think there is any really compelling evidence that they were censoring the info for political reasons. If I'm wrong then put it down to my naivete.