Race and the 2008 Election

Thanks for pointing us to the discussion.

I am going to link to this over on "GATHER Discusses Tolerance," at nohate.gather.com.

At this time in the US history the ethnicity of a person is irrelevant, and the religion of one is almost irrelevant also.

I am so disappointed to hear we are off topic with the race issue. Shame on the Clinton camp for the poorly chosen illustration pitting LBJ against the work of MLK. Please - it takes both "talkers " and "doers" in this world and Hillary could've picked a much more innocuous illustration to get this point across rather than something from the civil rights movement. Whether that was a blunder or a poorly executed strategy, who knows. But is it ugly. I caucused for Obama in Iowa and my take on his statement about "changing history" has to do with restoring some sanity to a government that has run our great country into ruin and getting our country back from such a terrible administration. I read nothing into the changing history comment about electing the first black president -- honestly, that has just not been on my radar since getting excited about Obama's potential two years ago! He is a bright man who is in touch with real issues of poverty, class, AND upward mobility in this country. His position comes from working along side the very people of this country who need his help -- not from planned visits to impoverished areas, posturing from the podium, and photo opps. I am one of the lily white Iowans, a female, and am about unifying this country WITH all our differences intact. I am not about these tired old arguments about race, religion, etc. We have bigger problems to face and it's going to take all of us moving in the same direction with a common will for survival -- not some egocentric idea of supremacy.

I have been greatly moved by political events of the past weeks. First, an audio recording was apparently forged by the White House in order to move the nation into war with Iran. If Dan Rather's firing was a precedent, most media outlets should have fired their newscasters for being taken in by the fraud.

Second, severe discrepancies have been found in the New Hampshire Democratic Primary results, to the point where impartial observers might say that Barack Obama won that primary.

Finally, we have two reports on Antarctic Ice, one that much of Antarctica has just begun to melt, and another report that the loss of the Larsen B ice shelf has now caused glacial ice behind the ice shelf to accelerate into the sea.

As I type, the message beneath this text box reads, "Report this as potentially inappropriate." I wish to report that your hour of programming was potentially inappropriate. It had nothing to do with high treason against the country, nor with a scale of runaway election fraud that invalidates our democracy, nor with the permanent flooding of your broadcasting studio with seawater. The hour struck me as fluff.

This program put OnPoint in the category of shrill coverage of political spin. There was no race story here, just a big media effort to create one, and OnPoint became part of that. This program should be the forum to discuss what's at stake in this election, not about further polarizing our politics. "Who played the race card?" Tom asked, baiting the discussants and the audience (which, during the segment I heard, was admirable in not taking this bait.)

The tone struck by the Democrats at last night's debate shows that the candidates see the wisdom in this--if NPR doesn't grasp this, noone in the media will.

My wife independently had the same reaction.

Clinton and Obama each make an indirect reference and On Point producers think we need an hour discussing race in the campaign? The media must take responsibility for influencing the debate.

Thankfully, most participants and callers recognized the low level of concern this topic deserved.