Review the NAACP's Questionnaire and a Legal
Scholar's Study of Candidates' Campaign Stances
The NAACP and legal scholar Vernellia Randall, of the
University of Dayton, Ohio, have done the national discourse a great service
through dint of hard work and attention to what has been almost totally lacking
in the Democratic presidential primary process: attention to the issues.
Both efforts were exhaustive. The NAACP submitted 37
questions to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, asking them to explain for the
record their positions on issues ranging from Affirmative Action, to
Reparations, discrimination in so-called "Charitable Choice,"
Election Reform, Voter Re-Enfranchisement, Voting Rights for DC, Federal
Judgeships, and Immigration.
The questions and the candidates responses can be accessed
at:
The
NAACP 2008 Presidential Candidate Civil Rights Questionnaire
http://www.naacp.org/news/press/2008-02-01/RESPONSES.
Clinton_Obama.pdf
Prof. Randall looks deep into the candidates' views on how
race affects the legal system, and what can be done about it. In her words, the
assessment "is not
about which candidate's platform is best, but which
candidate does more than acknowledge the existence of racial
inequalities, but includes a plan to eliminate those inequalities."
She reviews
the candidates public statements on "eliminating racial inequalities" in the
justice system, their failure to acknowledge inequalities, or their admission
that inequalities exist, but failure to propose ways of eliminating racial bias
under the law. Her topics range across the entire spectrum of reality in which
the legal system impacts the fates and fortunes of citizens, especially African
Americans.
Prof.
Randall's surveys of Clinton and Obama are found at:
Clinton's
Platform on Eliminating Racial Inequalities
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/2008ElectionandRacism/Clinton/
Clinton00.htm
and,
Obama's
Platform on Eliminating Racial Inequalities
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/2008ElectionandRacism/Obama/
Obama00.htm
We urge
those who are serious about politics to review and save these two valuable
studies. We at BAR have found they confirm what we, as journalists, have long
noted: there are exceedingly few substantive differences between Obama
and Clinton. Virtually all that separates them is their styles of public performance and
rhetoric - and both are largely bereft of ideas for true "change."
But check
it out for yourself.
- The Editors
“The President of the United States is more/ the President of my country/ than the President of my country.”
Marco Rubio's speeches invoking a shared Western civilization are part of the ideological consolidation of fascism, mobilizing white racial solidarity to defend a declining capitalist order.
Nayib Bukele, El Salvador’s president, joins Erik Prince, the US, and the UN to kill more Haitians.
Navi Pillay’s participation in the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) should have disqualified her for consideration for the Nobel or any other peace prize.
The media uses vague language to protect billionaires from judgment and pressures people to pursue change through polite, respectable channels. The result is that readers become spectators of…
