When is it acceptable to call these things out?

How could one reconcile a political belief that racism is wrong, sexism is wrong, homophobia is wrong, that the current power structures and their corollary prejudiced belief systems are wrong and corrupt and hurting our country, and even tacit support for, and a complete lack of opposition to, tactics that use these prejudices?

This is not just about Obama and Hillary and politics. This is about, to me at least, trying to wake other progressives up to the fact that we need to start combating what is wrong once again instead of ignoring evil for political convenience. Why is THAT beyond the pale?

This seems like a decision to get on a train that was leaving the station (meaning that black voters in SC are already defecting to Obama in droves, with or without Clyburn), and an effort to outflank those who might say he was awfully late in getting there.

I also think it’s a divisive way to announce his endorsement — he could have said “Barack Obama has convinced me with his poise, his policies. Maybe stress Obama’s likelihood to understand black issues and problems better.

Instead he goes out of his way to insinuate that Hillary Clinton is subtly racist and that her one-off remarks praising the accomplishments of the Civil Rights era are significantly damaging to the overall legacy of MLK.

So we’ve had Cong. Jackson questioning whether Hillary really got emotional, Clyburn saying she’s subtly racist. All we need is for Gloria Steinem to come out and say that it was a mistake to let the Civil Rights movement get going before the women’s rights movement, and we could have the bitterest, most divisive presidential primary since Bryan the fake populist outflanked the Populist Party with his cross-of-gold speech, splitting the liberal vote and pretty directly leading to the final imposition of apartheid in the American South.

Just saying. Let’s keep the rhetoric and finger-pointing toned down, huh? I think insinuating that the Clinton’s are racist is beyond the pale.