Roland S. Martin
AC360° Contributor
CNN Political Analyst
 
Last week while in Martha’s Vineyard, we had some major technical issues that knocked WVON-AM/Chicago off the air. I was just talking and talking until we were notified that we were not broadcasting.

So instead of talking for three hours for the online audience, I chose to play Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.’s 1988 speech at the Democratic National Convention.

In a truly mesmerizing speech that still make tears well up in my eyes, Jackson spoke to the pain and success of his supporters and the nation, but also offered some critical words that explained why the name of the first African American to run all primary races should go into nomination.

“As a testament to the struggles of those who have gone before; as a legacy for those who will come after; as a tribute to the endurance, the patience, the courage of our forefathers and mothers; as an assurance that their prayers are being answered, that their work has not been in vain, and, that hope is eternal, tomorrow night my name will go into nomination for the Presidency of the United States of America,” he said to rousing applause.

And later in the speech, Jackson told his personal story of being raised by a single mother, growing up with three last names, and the poor conditions he endured in South Carolina.

But he also offered a compelling reason why his name should go in nomination, which also can be used by the ardent supporters of Sen. Hillary Clinton today.

“Every one of these funny labels they put on you, those of you who are watching this broadcast tonight in the projects, on the corners, I understand. Call you outcast, low down, you can't make it, you're nothing, you're from nobody, subclass, underclass; when you see Jesse Jackson, when my name goes in nomination, your name goes in nomination,” he said.

Women have waited years to see one of their own ascend to the presidency. While other nations have elected female leaders, America is 43 for 43 when it comes to white men. When her name goes in nomination, their name goes in.

And it’s no different for African Americans. A nation that once enslaved millions of Africans could be on the verge of seeing the son of an African father and Kansas mother occupy 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. When Obama accepts the nomination, they accept the nomination.

Yet the difference between 1988 and 2008 is that Jackson and his supporters accepted the reality that he wasn’t the nominee, and that continuing to champion his cause – and ignoring the nominee, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis – could spell doom for the party in capturing the White House.

"The only time that we win is when we come together. In 1960, John Kennedy, the late John Kennedy, beat Richard Nixon by only 112,000 votes - less than one vote per precinct. He won by the margin of our hope. He brought us together. He reached out…

“In 1964, Lyndon Johnson brought both wings together - the thesis, the antithesis, and the creative synthesis - and together we won. In 1976, Jimmy Carter unified us again, and we won. When do we not come together, we never win. In 1968, the division and despair in July led to our defeat in November. In 1980, rancor in the spring and the summer led to Reagan in the fall. When we divide, we cannot win. We must find common ground as the basis for survival and development and change and growth.”

But when you have groups like Party Unity My Ass – PUMA – and MakeThemAccountable.com continue to assert that Clinton should be the nominee, and do everything to doom Obama’s chances in November – that runs counter to the issues that Clinton and Obama stand for – health care, ending the war in Iraq, not having conservatives have a majority on the Supreme Court, and so many others.

Choosing to champion McCain as “payback” against Obama and the Democratic Party will do the one thing Dems say they don’t want: guarantee a McCain victory.

Even conservatives have figured this out. Many of them can’t stand Sen. John McCain for a litany of reasons (remember the right wing talkers saying they would vote for Clinton over McCain in November?). But if it’s seeing Obama getting sworn in, they’ve decided to put their personal feelings aside to focus on winning. And in the end, that’s all that matters.

Even Jackson spoke to this issue in his 1988 speech during the section where he made the case for Dukakis.

“Our ships could pass in the night - if we have a false sense of independence - or they could collide and crash. We would lose our passengers. We can seek a high reality and a greater good. Apart, we can drift on the broken pieces of Reagonomics, satisfy our baser instincts, and exploit the fears of our people. At our highest, we can call upon noble instincts and navigate this vessel to safety. The greater good is the common good.

“As Jesus said, ‘Not My will, but Thine be done.’ It was his way of saying there's a higher good beyond personal comfort or position.

“The good of our Nation is at stake. It's commitment to working men and women, to the poor and the vulnerable, to the many in the world.”

Latoya Peterson
Editor of Racialicious.com

If calling an entire group of people the n-word isn't talking down to blacks, I don't know what is.

While the term may be used casually by some members of my community, Jesse Jackson has made his career of challenging racial stereotypes and denouncing those in the public eye who have used the word – including being at the forefront of the protests involving Michael Richards and Don Imus. It is a rather strange twist that "n*****s" rolled off his lips so casually – particularly in a news room setting.

In his book, "The N-Word: Who Can Say It, Who Shouldn't and Why," journalist Jabari Asim explores the history of the word and deems it "a metaphor for these various ideas involving citizenship and black inferiority." The NAACP declared when they chose to symbolically bury the word, "The N-Word is the most well known example of racist language by others and self hatred by African Americans." Clearly, there is no excuse for its’ use.

Jackson's comments were beyond the pale and one wonders what would prompt him to make such statements. Perhaps, out of frustration, Jackson forgot his role as a civil rights leader and let his anger loose – language be damned!

Regardless of how Barack Obama chooses to handle the situation, Jackson is going to take a well deserved hit to his reputation and credibility.

Perhaps it is time for Jesse Jackson to take a good long rest outside of the public eye.

Failing that, I'm sure he could join Michael Richards on a comedy tour.

Editor’s Note: See Jason Carroll’s report on Etiquette of the N-word on AC360° tonight at 10pm.

Faye Wattleton
President, Center for the Advancement of Women

There is a lengthy legacy of politician striking the wrong tone on the role of African-American men in the family. There tends to be more you-shoulds and not enough I-wills. The question remains whether politicians have the will to change the paradigm by which black men are viewed (or not) and judged. Save the unnecessary vulgar references to presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama, Jesse Jackson’s “off-the-mike” comments Wednesday weren’t so off-the-mark.

Rather than attacking only the personal responsibility of African-American fathers, it is essential to continue to address the systemic changes needed to eliminate the conditions sustaining the epidemic of absentee fathers, which isn’t exclusively a “black” phenomenon.

Mr. Obama has written and spoken extensively about growing up without a father, which gave him a personal perspective of the impact of a fatherless household. As he acknowledged during his Father’s Day speech in the forum of the predominantly African-American Apostolic Church of God, growing up in Hawaii, with supportive grandparents and scholarships to some of the best schools isn’t quite the same as being a black child in a single-parent household in today’s world.

In the wealthiest nation of the world, black children are the sons and daughters of fathers who attended substandard public schools that didn’t prepare them for a global frontier. Yes, it’s good that children read books, but the future of the information age is in the multi-faceted media, which our children must navigate if they’re to successfully compete in a multi-national world. African-American fathers face subtle and not so subtle workplace discrimination because of their race, leading to a substantial income inequity. Their families experience an alarming disparity in access to equitable healthcare leading to higher incidence of chronic disease and shorter life spans. African-American families live in every day more disintegrated neighborhoods, where young black men are victims of racial profiling and everyone is subject to shocking incarceration disparities.

Mr. Obama doesn’t have to be born again in a poor African-American family to experience this plight that, at every socio economic level, is the experience of most slave descendents. Instead, use of the presidential pulpit is a powerful platform to set forth his vision for a presidency that will help black parents become educated, stay healthy, secure fair employment and live free of a criminal justice that continues to target and incarcerate a disproportionate number of African-American males. He should specify how his policies will enfranchise fathers as active participants in raising their children for the 21st Century.

“Talking down” to black folks isn’t new.Mr. Obama has the opportunity to use his unique position as the first African-American presidential nominee, to reflect a vision that is relevant and powerful for African-American families, regardless of his composition.

Jack White
TheRoot.com

Sure, Jesse is an old fool who doesn't know how to act. But his latest gaffe shows how none of us is really ready for this moment.

On one level, it is easy to dismiss the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.'s crudely worded metaphorical threat to castrate Barack Obama for supposedly talking down to black people as the raving of an increasingly irrelevant, former big shot suffused with resentment at the rising star who pushed him off stage.

That, after all, is the sort of talk we'd expect from a lynch mob, not a civil rights leader who does not seem to realize that the times have passed him by. Even his son and namesake, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., agrees that his dad is doing more harm these days than good. Pronouncing himself outraged and disappointed by his father's ugly words about Obama, Jackson Jr. issued a statement that, in effect, ordered dear old dad to "keep hope alive" and shut up.

That's good advice, and one can only hope that Jackson Sr. accepts it. But in a deeper sense, his stunningly inappropriate comments symbolize the social, political and psychological vertigo that all of us, and especially black Americans, are experiencing because of Obama's success. We are all, including Obama, in a place we never really thought we would be, and it has knocked us off our feet. We don't know how to act. We don't have a plan. We're searching for our equilibrium. And until we regain our footing, we can expect all sorts of bizarre behavior from people who ought to know better. Hold on to your hat.

We haven't really been in a place this confusing since 1954, when the NAACP's crusade against segregation culminated in the Brown vs. Board decision and the walls came tumbling down. It's fair to say that we were so focused on winning that fight that we weren't prepared for the victory or its aftermath. We've spent nearly 60 years since then trying to figure out what kind of relationship we want to have with America and with each other. For the most part, we, like Jackson Sr., have seen ourselves as outsiders battling for justice and a seat at the table. Our default has been to protest. And while that mindset has served us well, it has, in a flash, been made damn near obsolete by the prospect, even the likelihood, that one of us may soon become the most powerful man in the world. If that happens, how can we seriously argue that we're being held back by anything but the limits we place on ourselves?

Read the rest of this entry.

Editor's Note: Jack White is a former columnist with TIME magazine.

Editor's note: Eric Easter writes about politics, culture and technology for ebonyjet.com

Eric Easter
Chief of Digital Strategy for Johnson Publishing

Jesse Jackson made a mistake and he has appropriately apologized. His language was unnecessary, his timing off and the venue (Fox News of all places) gave the comment an illegitimate quality that marred the underlying point Jackson was making, though the castration analogy didn’t exactly help either. It’s all about context. In another setting, stated another way to a different group of people, his comment could have had the power to begin a dialogue to address some of the concerns about Obama’s appeal to mainstream voters and what that means.

But of course, it’s not just what you say, it’s where, how, when and to whom that matter as well. He learned a lesson. But according to quite a number of prominent black activists who are strong Obama supporters but “lovingly critical”, Obama should learn a lesson about what he says and to whom as well.

Far from some sign of a rift between Jackson and Obama, what Jackson said was repeated many times in various forms at the recent Rainbow PUSH Coalition by many thoughtful Black activists who, while supportive of Obama, also choose to be “lovingly critical” to ensure that Obama lives up to the promise he presents.

Read more...

Roland S. Martin
CNN Political Analyst
AC360° Contributor

There have been two constants in this presidential campaign: Sen. Barack Obama will openly discuss his faith and present some of today’s most troublesome issues through a moral prism. And the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. will say something outlandish and stupid that he will have to apologize for.

First, he told a reporter in South Carolina last year that Obama was “acting white” in his response to the issues in Jena, Louisiana. Then the good Rev wrote an op-ed piece proclaiming that then-Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards was the only one speaking to issues of importance to African Americans.

Now, in his most vile and pathetic comments yet, Jackson was overhead telling a fellow panelist prior to an interview on Fox that he was going to cut Obama’s “nuts off” for his speeches on morality and fatherhood in the black community.

Rewind that for a moment. An African American reverend – someone who is called by God to speak to moral issues of the day – takes issue with an African American presidential candidate speaking about faith-based issues and the need for black men to take care of their children, for parents to care about their child’s health, and to turn the television off and to start reading more and more books?

If there was any further evidence needed to show that Rev. Jackson has lost his moral compass and is far out of touch with the state of black America today, this is it. And it is clear that Jackson has forgotten that as a minister, his first goal is to always address the moral issues before anything else.

I am a long-awaited family reunion cruise, and was doing all I could to stay away from work after a grueling primary season. But when I saw this story, and the lame excuses Rev. Jackson offered, nothing could keep from jotting down a few words.

Folks, I have written on numerous occasions what it was like as a teen to see Rev. Jackson stand before the Democratic national convention in 1984 and 1988 and give two of the finest speeches in history (both are on my iPod). He has left a significant legacy on the history on this nation by his work on behalf of civil rights.

But all of the good that he has accomplished it withering away due to his ego run amok, and unwillingness to step aside and allow the next generation of leaders to take their rightful place. He has long claimed the mantle of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and has run with that baton as fast and as hard as he can. Yet what he continues to do is tarnish his legacy, and leave a bad aftertaste in the mouths of folks today that were babes when “Run, Jesse, Run” was a rallying cry across the nation.

What is especially galling is that Jackson would make such an idiotic comment about a man who is desperately trying to advance the issues near and dear to African Americans – and all Americans – while also speaking truth to the major problems affecting the black community.

Jackson seems to want Obama to shut up on the issue of black men fathering children out of wedlock and not taking care of their responsibility. Instead, he wants him to keep his sights on jobs, economic development and education.

And that nonsense about talking down to black people? That’s the kind of BS I’ve always heard, and it’s Jackson’s way of saying Obama thinks he is better than other black folks. That’s, right. It’s just another way of calling him uppity.

Part of the problem could be that figures like Jackson have lost a lot of their moral standing, often by their own doing. Rev. Jackson can’t necessarily give the same speech Obama gave because he committed adultery and had a child out of wedlock several years ago. He’s taking care of the young girl, but another child being raised by a single mother – even if it carries the last name Jackson – is part of the problem in black America (Yea, I said it, and someone has to stop dancing around the elephant in the room).

The issue of the black family, and the destruction of it, is the main problem we face (something that will be dealt with in CNN’s Black in America series premiering July 23 and July 24). We can talk ad nauseam about education and wealth creation, but when you have 7 out 10 children born out of wedlock; those single women having to raise those children all alone; and the rampant black-on-black crime, fueled by many of these same children, that proves we have issues that must be confronted, from the pulpit to the pew.

Instead of trying to tear Obama down or anyone else who is sick and tired of the moral decay in parts of black America, Jackson should be joining the chorus of those who say, “Enough is enough.”

I was at the Essence Music Festival over the July 4th weekend in New Orleans, and more than 5,000 people crammed into the Morial Convention Center to hear Bill Cosby speak from the same template as Obama. He didn’t hold back or mince words. He discussed domestic violence, the lack of educational achievement, and the need for black parents to raise their game. Jackson previously stood with Cosby, especially when he caught heat for his words, so what’s good for America’s Dad is not good for the guy who wants to be America’s president?

Instead of denouncing, Jackson and others should praise Obama, Sen. John McCain and other political leaders who are willing to raise their voices to moral issues today.

And if Rev. Jackson or others got a problem with a politician speaking truth to African Americans, the hell with them.

As a child of God, I’ll gladly stand on the side of any man or woman, Republican or Democrat, who is willing to say what’s right. Not what’s popular.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson has apologized to Sen. Barack Obama for his 'hurtful' remarks.

Carmen Van Kerckhove
President, New Demographic, a consulting firm that addresses race and racism

Watching news coverage of Jesse Jackson’s remarks about Barack Obama “talking down to black people” reminded me of a conversation I had in 2000.

I was chatting over lunch with a couple of co-workers about celebrity gossip, and the conversation turned to Halle Berry's multiracial identity. My co-workers scoffed at the idea that a person could identify as biracial, declaring: "When it comes down to it, you know what side Halle's on."

At the time I wondered to myself: When it comes down to what? The inevitable great race war? Will we all have to pick a side once and for all and declare our racial allegiance?

Much has already been made about the supposed rift between “the old guard” represented by Jackson and “the new guard” represented by Obama. But to me, the Jackson incident is emblematic of a different issue. Namely, the anxiety that different racial or ethnic groups - especially blacks and whites - are feeling about whether Obama has their best interests at heart.

Judging from the Democratic primary results, Obama enjoys overwhelming support among African-American voters. But that doesn’t mean that black voters have no criticisms or doubts about his intentions. Many black journalists and bloggers, for example, expressed concern that Obama’s father’s day speech, though delivered to an all-black audience, was really aimed at assuring white voters that he could deliver “tough love” to people of his own community.

Similarly, all the hand-wringing about Obama’s patriotism (or lack thereof, according to some flag pin enthusiasts) has really been a coded way of asking: Is Obama going to look out for white folks too? The countless internet rumors and conspiracy theories - the “whitey” tape, Obama’s birth certificate, Obama’s secret Muslim faith - to me all indicate an underlying sense of unease among many whites. Few would admit to it openly, but I think that on some level, there are white Americans who fear that Obama will use his presidency to exact racial retribution for the historical oppression of African-Americans.

As a multiracial person myself, I know a thing or two about having my racial loyalty and authenticity called into question. But the racial tightrope Obama has to walk is on a whole other level.

No matter how hard he tries to distance himself from folks like Farrakhan or Wright - those who are associated in the public imagination with radical black politics - he will still be viewed with suspicion by some white voters. No matter how hard he emphasizes his involvement and contributions to the African-American community - some black voters will still believe he’s not committed enough to racial justice.

Editor's Note: Carmen Van Kerckhove is an Obama supporter. New Demographic is a consulting firm that addresses race and racism.

Morning folks...

Almost lost in the uproar over a somewhat obscene whisper – did the Rev. Jesse Jackson tap into a feeling among African-Americans that Sen. Barack Obama is talking down to them with his emphasis on faith-based initiatives, and his calling on the black community to pick itself up?

By the way, do Obama's inspirational urgings to African Americans bear more diplomatic traces of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's self-help message to parishioners?

In any case, Obama's efforts to inspire African-Americans are different from the message of civil rights leaders like Jackson. And that's why there's tension here. Jessica Yellin will report on that for us tonight. What's your take?

Randi Kaye is looking into Rev. Jackson's struggle to remain relevant. When he speaks up – how many are listening? He expresses as much frustration as inspiration these days, in private and in public. Has he been upstaged by a younger generation with a different take on how African Americans can make progress? Not just by Obama, but others, including his own son who criticized his father's remarks and who works for Obama.

Dana Bash is on McCain watch. Interesting tidbit from the campaign trail: National reporters were left out of a Q/A with local reporters yesterday, sparking protests from those who follow the candidate all day and night across the country. That prompted some to ask whether the Straight Talk Express will keep talking straight? Or was it a one-off? Stay tuned.

We're also watching the fires in California. After gaining some control, firefighters now find new flames blazing in Butte County, near, yes, "Paradise, California."

AND speaking of paradise, Gary Tuchman on South Carolina's effort to recognize it – right there on auto license plates... offering an "I believe" vanity plate if people want to pay for it. No comparable plate's been offered for people of other faiths. Those seeking to preserve the Founding Fathers' intended separation of church and state are calling foul. There's always the fish symbol bumper sticker for those who'd like to remind tailgaters of the hereafter that's so much closer than they might realize.

We've been talking about this story in the newsroom for a few days, in the morning we plan on getting it in the program, but then other news happens. We'll try again today.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson apologized Wednesday for "crude and hurtful" remarks he made about Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama after an interview with a Fox News correspondent.

The remarks came Sunday as Jackson was talking to a fellow interviewee, UnitedHealth Group executive Dr. Reed V. Tuckson. An open microphone picked up Jackson whispering, "See, Barack's been talking down to black people ... I want to cut his nuts off."

This morning Rev. Jackson explained his comments:

AC360° talked with David Gergen, The Reverend Al Sharpton, and Amy Holmes to dig deeper on the story:

Dr. Ronald Walters
NNPA Columnist
Originally posted 7/9/2008

Just back from the Rainbow Push convention in Chicago sponsored by Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., I was struck by the fact that neither Barack nor Michelle Obama showed up and they live virtually right down the street.

The symbol of Obama's absence was made even more vivid to me because he was out making nice with Hillary Clinton to knit together a unified campaign in the fall.

I understand that, but I also understand that he could have showed up, when Governor Bill Richardson, who lives in New Mexico not only showed up, but gave a rousing speech crediting the civil rights movement for much of the political success of the Hispanic community and his own.

I know, I know, it is common knowledge now that Barack Obama has to distance himself from Black radicals, from his church, and much of his community in order to make White voters comfortable enough with him to trust him and then give him their votes. And he will probably show at the NAACP Convention. But the troubling trend which finds him absent from other venues that are the substance of Black life looks like he is taking the Black community for granted because of their thirst for his victory.

I was not too put out when Obama did not show up at the State of Black America, because Michelle Obama was offered to Tavis Smiley and Obama was campaigning to win a touch primary in Indiana.

Jackson, however, not only was material in Barack Obama's rise to the State Senate and the U. S. senate, he represents to most people the living legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

That is important because the Civil Rights movement is implicated in Obama's victories, since he won 99 pledged Delegates in nine Southern states during the primary elections. This performance was in states where Blacks constituted one-third or more of the Democratic party base, states where the Voting Rights Act worked to empower Black voters to make a difference.

Without those 99 delegates, Hillary Clinton would have won the pledged delegate race and the popular vote and most surely would have won the nomination.

The question this raises is whether the sophistication of Black voters in this case will eventually cost them. Blacks have a long history of voting for Whites when the potential returns were based on hope.

If we support a Black candidate for president of the United States, I think that it is fair to ask whether we will have more or less access – at least as much access as we did to Bill Clinton – and whether he will deliver the goods for our community.

My concern here is that theory of Black politics should be to move our community from just hoping their political participation will lead to resources, to exercising tough leverage over politicians to negotiate potential returns to our community in exchange for our vote.

In fact, one of the lessons of Rev. Jackson's two previous presidential campaigns is that "Hope and Trust politics" is not as effective as the ability to trade votes for future support. The irony is however, that when a Black person runs for high profile office our leverage often disappears because we are asked to trust that the person will deliver based on their ties to the Black community.

The Black community didn't have to play the politics of leverage with Rev. Jackson because he had proved his fidelity to their needs through his history and in his presidential campaigns he spoke forcefully to their issues. I know, I know, he didn't win.

But I am driven to ask what the traditional notion of "winning" is worth under circumstances where the level of trust is not as high, because the message is absent and the candidate is absent. In other words, how much can the Black community count on the delivery of goods and services by a Black president who presence and message does not privilege his own community.

What concerns me is that we are involved in a great celebration without checking the guidepost that determine whether or not there will be sufficient returns to our community from a Black president in the White House. The irony is that Obama is likely to win, we will have to accept him, but under circumstances where he is essentially a White candidate, so we should "bottom line" our public policy requirements now as every other community is doing.

Dr. Ron Walters is the Distinguished Leadership Scholar, Director of the African American Leadership Center and Professor of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland College Park.

Jesse Jackson’s moment caught on tape isn’t his first trip-up. And he’s been upstaged by younger black leaders… even now by his own son, who criticized him. Tonight, we look at Jackson's struggle to remain relevant. Tonight, 10 ET

JOIN: LIVE BLOG Weeknights 10p ET

WATCH: Our Studio Webcam 9:45p-11p ET