Conquer Club

The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill.

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

The remark stirred a murmur at the reception, held by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Foundation as part of a series of events revolving around the 25th anniversary of Jackson’s run for president. Several CBC members were in attendance, including Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who’d introduced Jackson.

Davis, who is running for governor, is the only black member of Congress from Alabama.

He is also the only member of the CBC to have voted against the healthcare bill earlier this month.

Davis referred to Jackson’s 1988 run for president in a statement, issued through his office, that said he would not engage Jackson on his criticism.

“One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” Davis’s statement said. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”

Jackson said later that he "didn't call anybody by name and I won't."

He added that he wasn't saying that black lawmakers must vote a certain way. Instead, they should vote the interests of the people in their districts, and he said the healthcare bill would help Alabama because it's one of the poorest states in the country.

"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Other members of the CBC found no fault in Jackson's words. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) was in the audience. He called Jackson's criticism of Davis "accurate," but said he did not hear Jackson say "You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man."

"If it is an issue that disproportionately impacts black folks, race has to be considered," Cleaver said. Jackson, he added, "is expected by his constituency to call balls and strikes."

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called the remarks "vintage Jesse Jackson," but said Davis's vote against healthcare was consistent with a voting record more conservative than many CBC members.

"Artur Davis has a more conservative constituency," Waters said. "Since he's running for governor of Alabama, he reflects an even more conservative constituency."

Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) said each man was doing what he considered the right thing.

"People have a right to vote their constituency, and people have a right to speak their conscience," Jackson-Lee said. "Both happened."

Davis’s Democratic primary opponent, Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, highlighted Davis’s status as the lone African-American vote against the bill.

“He was the only Black Caucus member to vote against it. I don’t get it,” Sparks said last week, according to The Associated Press. Sparks is white.

Davis said he voted against the healthcare bill because "House leadership's approach is not the best we can do." He said he preferred a version passed by the Senate Finance Committee because it reduces subsidization of the healthcare industry, taxes high-value health plans instead of wealthy people, and is more effective in getting employers to help with health coverage.

Davis has countered that Sparks’s position on healthcare has changed over time, saying he’s being “deliberately dishonest.”

The primary will be June 1. All of the GOP candidates for governor have been critical of the healthcare legislation, according to the AP.

nagerous wrote:"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Wise words.

72o wrote:
I disagree.

Snorri1234 wrote:

72o wrote:
I disagree.

Yeah but that's because you're stupid.

72o wrote:

nagerous wrote:"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Wise words.

I disagree. I'd say their infant mortality and life expectancy rates are directly proportionate to their social behaviors. These are choices that they make. They don't properly care for their children, and they don't properly prevent unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy that they can't afford. On top of that, they use alcohol, drugs, and tobacco more than other demographics, especially among expectant mothers.

I'm sure you're going to refute this argument with "the rich people force them to be like that". You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I do not share it.

GabonX wrote:

72o wrote:

nagerous wrote:"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Wise words.

I disagree. I'd say their infant mortality and life expectancy rates are directly proportionate to their social behaviors. These are choices that they make. They don't properly care for their children, and they don't properly prevent unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy that they can't afford. On top of that, they use alcohol, drugs, and tobacco more than other demographics, especially among expectant mothers.

I'm sure you're going to refute this argument with "the rich people force them to be like that". You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I do not share it.

Seriously man, that's all whitey's fault..

GabonX wrote:

72o wrote:

nagerous wrote:"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Wise words.

I disagree. I'd say their infant mortality and life expectancy rates are directly proportionate to their social behaviors. These are choices that they make. They don't properly care for their children, and they don't properly prevent unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy that they can't afford. On top of that, they use alcohol, drugs, and tobacco more than other demographics, especially among expectant mothers.

I'm sure you're going to refute this argument with "the rich people force them to be like that". You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I do not share it.

Seriously man, that's all whitey's fault..

thegreekdog wrote:

GabonX wrote:

72o wrote:

nagerous wrote:"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Wise words.

I disagree. I'd say their infant mortality and life expectancy rates are directly proportionate to their social behaviors. These are choices that they make. They don't properly care for their children, and they don't properly prevent unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy that they can't afford. On top of that, they use alcohol, drugs, and tobacco more than other demographics, especially among expectant mothers.

I'm sure you're going to refute this argument with "the rich people force them to be like that". You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I do not share it.

Seriously man, that's all whitey's fault..

That's (sort of) what I'm getting at with the two Reverends. They seem to be more about what can the black community get and less about what can the black community do (with some exceptions, of course).

thegreekdog wrote:Yeah, I'm not trying to stereotype African Americans, which is why I asked the question (i.e. whether the Reverends are representative of blacks in this country). I also agree that they are out for themselves, of course, but I don't necessarily blame them for that. I'm out for myself too.

Nas wrote:I think Jesse Jackson's the biggest player hater. His time is up. All you old niggas' time is up. We heard your voice, we saw your marching, we heard your sermons. We don't want to hear that shit no more. It's a new day. It's a new voice. I'm here now. We don't need Jesse; I'm here. I got this. We the voice now. It's no more Jesse. Sorry. Good bye. You ain't helping nobody in the 'hood and that's the bottom line. Goodbye, Jesse. Bye!

BigBallinStalin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

GabonX wrote:

72o wrote:

nagerous wrote:"The poorest people need healthcare protection," Jackson said. "They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They're dying from lack of access."

Wise words.

I disagree. I'd say their infant mortality and life expectancy rates are directly proportionate to their social behaviors. These are choices that they make. They don't properly care for their children, and they don't properly prevent unwanted pregnancy, or pregnancy that they can't afford. On top of that, they use alcohol, drugs, and tobacco more than other demographics, especially among expectant mothers.

I'm sure you're going to refute this argument with "the rich people force them to be like that". You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I do not share it.

Seriously man, that's all whitey's fault..

That's (sort of) what I'm getting at with the two Reverends. They seem to be more about what can the black community get and less about what can the black community do (with some exceptions, of course).

From what I've seen on a day to day basis from the two Revs (Jackson and Al Sharpton) is that they exploit their own people for their own benefit. Honestly, I don't think they really care about helping the poor--not nearly as much as they care about helping themselves. Perhaps, at one time, they meant well, but from what I've seen from them in the past 5 years (and much more before then, I'm sure) is that they're out there to watch out for Number 1. ("And make sure ya don't step in number 2." Thank you, Rodney.)

And on a side note: of course, the blame is very easy to cast by saying things that 72o says, but it's far from the truth. Whenever people get into that kind of talk, they really don't know what it's like, so they rely heavily on stereotypes and over-generalizations.

72o wrote:
My post was in response to the Rev's statement that poor people need healthcare more than others because of infant mortality and low life expectancy. I didn't mention race.

I would contend that poor people have greater access to health care than the lower middle class. My wife's entire family is on Medicaid. They've never even seen a medical bill, wouldn't know what one was. But they've had many, many more visits to hospitals and doctors than my family ever will. They call an ambulance for just about anything. Her half-sister just had her third baby last night. She's never worked a day in her life. She's 300 pounds. Smokes like a chimney. Even through her pregnancies. Eats nothing but McDonalds and other shit. I know at least a dozen people just like her.

You're going to tell me that I'm over-generalizing, that all poor people aren't like that. I'm sure you're right, they aren't all like that, but if you did a scientific study of the number of poor people like that, and the number of the rest of the population that are like that, I'd bet a month's salary that there would be statistical significance. Because that's all there can ever be, a statistical correlation. You can always use the excuse that there's one or two that don't behave a certain way, but that doesn't mean it's not a valid generalization.

jbrettlip wrote:I think the Rev's appeal more to the poor inner city black people. Those are the one's that haven't realized the American dream due to economics, education and prejudice. Just like David Duke in LA won elections by catering to the lowest common denominator of the white population. Most of the black people I know, are not fans of Jesse Jackson. But then again, they are employed, home owners just like me. So I don't think "race" has anything to do with it. Poor white people rally around leaders who promise to make their life better, just as poor black people do.

the big picture here is the fact that the USA can't afford this program. Entitlement programs dont work in the long run. too few people pay taxes in the US and demand these social programs. It is basic economics. If you believe this will actually save money, you don't belong in a rational discussion.

thegreekdog wrote:

jbrettlip wrote:I think the Rev's appeal more to the poor inner city black people. Those are the one's that haven't realized the American dream due to economics, education and prejudice. Just like David Duke in LA won elections by catering to the lowest common denominator of the white population. Most of the black people I know, are not fans of Jesse Jackson. But then again, they are employed, home owners just like me. So I don't think "race" has anything to do with it. Poor white people rally around leaders who promise to make their life better, just as poor black people do.

the big picture here is the fact that the USA can't afford this program. Entitlement programs dont work in the long run. too few people pay taxes in the US and demand these social programs. It is basic economics. If you believe this will actually save money, you don't belong in a rational discussion.

Thanks, this is what I was looking for (and what I suspected based on discussions I had with my black friends in real life).

I've always thought that while racism certainly does exist, impediments to "living the American dream" (for lack of a better term) has more to do with economics than race. So I always thought that the Reverends should be less concerned with race (at least now) and more concerned with economics.

jbrettlip wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

jbrettlip wrote:I think the Rev's appeal more to the poor inner city black people. Those are the one's that haven't realized the American dream due to economics, education and prejudice. Just like David Duke in LA won elections by catering to the lowest common denominator of the white population. Most of the black people I know, are not fans of Jesse Jackson. But then again, they are employed, home owners just like me. So I don't think "race" has anything to do with it. Poor white people rally around leaders who promise to make their life better, just as poor black people do.

the big picture here is the fact that the USA can't afford this program. Entitlement programs dont work in the long run. too few people pay taxes in the US and demand these social programs. It is basic economics. If you believe this will actually save money, you don't belong in a rational discussion.

Thanks, this is what I was looking for (and what I suspected based on discussions I had with my black friends in real life).

I've always thought that while racism certainly does exist, impediments to "living the American dream" (for lack of a better term) has more to do with economics than race. So I always thought that the Reverends should be less concerned with race (at least now) and more concerned with economics.

Yeah, but the poor white people in Louisiana are NEVER going to follow Jackson no matter what he says. SO racism does play a role, just as it still does 130 yrs after slavery ended. These people stuck in tenements and on welfare have little to no way ever to get out, so they hope for change or look to handouts. I am not faulting them, if I were in a hopeless situation and my family had been for generations. I would probably do the same thing.

PS just to clarify, I am not black. I think the OP originally said he wanted ot hear from black users.

john9blue wrote:Jackson is racist...

/thread

JACKAZZTJM wrote:Jesse is right and u cant call urself a black man if .....uve never been to prison!