Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleEditorial:
Faithful to history
Instead of trying to create false issues, candidates should focus on what matters
Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2008 | 2 a.m.
Sen. Hillary Clinton has been criticized by political opponents for innocuous comments she made last week about President Lyndon B. Johnson’s work to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
This is what she said:
“I would point to the fact that Dr. (Martin Luther) King’s dream began to be realized when President 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,” she said. “That dream became a reality, the power of that dream became real in people’s lives because we had a president who said we are going to do it and actually got it accomplished.”
That comment has been wrongly transformed by some into an insult to the legacy of the slain civil rights leader. That view has been fanned by political opportunists, who see this as a chance to take voters from her, especially in South Carolina and in Nevada as well.
Democratic presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., asked about the racial tenor of the campaign, told the Sun on Sunday: “I am puzzled by it. She made a statement about Dr. King that I think was ill-advised. But I said nothing about it. Suddenly she is blaming us for distorting her words. I don’t know how I could distort her words since I hadn’t commented on her words since she made the statement.”
Former Sen. John Edwards told a church congregation in South Carolina this weekend that he was “troubled” by the “suggestion that real change came not through the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King but through a Washington politician. I fundamentally disagree with that.”
What Obama sees as unfortunate and what Edwards disagrees with is the truth. King stirred the nation and rallied people to the civil rights movement, yet it took Johnson to use his considerable influence to get Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act the following year.
Clinton is not insulting King’s memory on Sunday she said he should receive the lion’s share of the credit she is pointing out the reality: It takes a president to make things happen in Washington.
On Monday both Obama and Clinton called for unity, saying they were on the same side in terms of diversity and civil rights, and that is another good point. This should not be an issue.
After George W. Bush’s failed presidency, the focus should be on which candidate has the know-how and ability to get things done if elected president.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- UNLV can move forward without the burden of losing streak to San Diego State
- A wife’s wisdom shows birth control issue needn’t be divisive
- Surprise links, negotiated deals addressed by commissioners
- Motorcycle accident claims life of man in northeast valley
- Hope and change and … what’s missing?
- New York mayor has the right idea
- We don’t need a CEO in charge
- Paying our own way
- Country has ‘given’ citizens a lot
- Jerry Tarkanian: Mike Moser impresses yet again on a day to remember former Rebel greats
Blogs
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
I would agree with Sen Clinton's discussion on MLK, LBJ, and the perspective on both. I think the issue will go away.
But, the writer's last comment on bush, "failed Presidency" is just another thoughtless shot at this president. I know it is easy 'run with the pack', but to perform real journalistic analysis and to be objective is a valued trait; This writer took a shortcut way out. When Bush is reviewed by History I think we will find that he did a pretty good job.
If you look at Clinton's comments on Dr. King & LBJ regarding "King's dream began to be realized...", you will not only see a discounting of Dr King but of all of the real life actions (not talk) that were taken by all of the people in the civil rights effort over many years. While the role of presidents and other top leaders is crucial to any significant change. Most change and effort comes from concerned people. Clinton took a shallow look at history to try to make her dubious political point that she would "get it done". Not only does Obama have a "grounds up" campaign that seems to listen, learn and truly value people, but he seems to be showing that he is a more effective leader when it comes to keeping his campaign on message.
Any google search will reveal the very close relationship between the Greenspun family, owners and editors of this newspaper, and the Clintons. Which explains the obvious bias of this editorial and the positive spin given to all stories about Hillary Clinton. Enough said.
Why do Obama supporters want to rewrite history?
Dr. King would be the first to acknowledge LBJ's vital role in bringing King's vision for America closer to reality by pushing through the Civil Rights Act 1964 and the Voting Rights Act 1965.
LBJ acted out of principle and at great personal and political cost. Congress was reluctant to vote for these acts because they knew the cost to the Democratic Party would be deep and long lasting. It was LBJ who twisted the arms of Democrats and Republicans alike, and persuaded Republicans to make up the deficit caused by the "nay" votes of the southern Democrats.
Acknowledging LBJ's considerable contributions to the advance of civil rights in this country does nothing to diminish the enormous contribution Dr. King made to the cause of justice in America. I lived through that time. I know what happened. I'm appalled at the charges against Hillary Clinton for stating what was, and is, an absolute truth.
It did take an experienced and committed president to bring a dedicated and courageous prophet's vision to fruition. It still does.
History indeed!
Democrats, ask your favorite presidential candidate which state(s) George Bush won in 2000 that you will win this time? Remember, 270 Electoral College votes are needed to elect a President.
Here is a bit of history for you.
Since John Kennedy was elected President;
1) No sitting Senator or Congressman has been elected President. We have elected a Vice President(Bush I), 3 Governors (Carter, Clinton, Bush II), two who held no current office(Reagan, Nixon) and re-elected 4 Presidents(Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton).
2)No candidate from North of the Mason-Dixon Line has been elected President. 3 Presidents from Texas, 2 from California, 1 from Georgia, 1 from Arkansas. I am sure you can recall the opponents of the victors.
That is why it is imperative that Democrats nominate someone who can get 270! John Edwards is the only Democrat who matches this profile. If you nominate one of these Senators from North, they will lose.
Hillary said that Dr. King's dream "began to be realized" when President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law. Began? No one's denying Lyndon Johnson's role, but in that one statement she not only disses Dr. King's relevance but also completely forgets about those, black, white, rich, and poor, who worked tirelessly at a grassroots level.