Mo' Money! Mo' Money! Mo' Money! Clinton, Obama raising huge sums

Talk about the "little people" rising up!

Conventional wisdom said when this campaign began that the big donors would plop down their $2,300 and the person who raised the most would walk away with the nomination. Since Sen. Hillary Clinton was seen as the stronger of the two, conventional wisdom said she would dwarf her opponents.

But when Sen. Barack Obama raised more money than her in the first quarter of 2007, everyone took notice that he might be onto something.

And he's been on a roll ever since.

Clinton tried to stay in the game by loaning her campaign $5 million in January. When that was revealed, her donors kicked in big time, leading to her raising $35 million in February alone.

She was thrilled at that amount, her highest ever. But that was still behind the $36 million Obama raised in January.

Now we're hearing that Obama may have raised $50 million to $60 million in February, which would be astronomical.

Who is giving all this money? New donors.

I got this email from a white male in Massachusetts: "This is the first time in 57years I have contributed to a candidate."

My email box is filled with similar messages from blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asians, women, men, young folks and senior citizens.

People are putting their money where their mouth is, and it shows that folks care.

Sure, it's easy to say there is too much money in politics. But when you have 200,000 and 300,000 small donors - the folks who send in $5 to $100 - then that makes this process great.

Oprah, Barbara Streisand, Steven Spielberg or any other rich person could be worth billions, but they can only give $2,300 personally to a candidate. You get me 23 people who can give a candidate $100, that's still $2,300. In fact, it's better because that's also 23 voters compared to one.

Question of the Day: Have you given to any political candidate this year? If so, why? If not, why not? Lastly, do you believe there is too much money in politics?

Roland to discuss the political race on AC360 tonight at 10 p.m. EST

Guess what? We WON'T be discussing the Obama-Farrakhan issue! LOL

Roland to discuss Obama-Farrakhan on Lou Dobbs Tonight

I'll be on Lou Dobbs Tonight at 7 pm EST - I'm on after 7:30 pm EST - to discuss the Obama-Farrakhan story.

Let me know your thoughts.

Statement from Rep. Lewis on his switch from Clinton to Obama

Rep. John Lewis Will Cast Superdelegate Vote for Sen. Barack Obama

“After taking some time for serious reflection on this issue, I have decided that when I cast my vote as a superdelegate at the Democratic convention, it is my duty as a representative of the 5th Congressional District to express the will of the people. As a U.S. representative, it is my role not to try to subdue or suppress the will of the people, but to help it prosper and grow.

“Something is happening in America. There is a movement, there is a spirit, there is an enthusiasm in the hearts and minds of the American people that I have not seen in a long time, since the candidacy of Robert Kennedy. The people are pressing for a new day in American politics, and I think they see Sen. Barack Obama as a symbol of that change.”

“This has been a difficult decision for me. I have a deep and abiding love for both Sen. Clinton and President Clinton. Sen. Clinton is a brilliant and capable candidate. Regardless of what happens in November, the Democratic Party will be making history. However, the people of my district have spoken, and I think that as their vessel, I should represent their wishes at the convention. I have attempted to contact Sen. Clinton, and I have not spoken to President Clinton or Sen. Obama to arrive at this conclusion.

“I think the people of my district know that I arrive at my decisions independently, not based on politics or pressure, but because I believe it is right. When I speak to students about the Civil Rights Movement, I say that it is impossible to stop a determined movement that is captivating the American consciousness. I think the candidacy of Sen. Obama represents the beginning of a new movement in American political history that began in the hearts and minds of the people of this nation. And I want to be on the side of the people, on the side of the spirit of history.”

Rep. John Lewis now backing Obama

His support was on again, off again, and now it's on again.

Rep. John Lewis, the longtime Democratic congressman from Atlanta and civil rights stalwart, has switched his allegiance from Sen. Hillary Clinton to Sen. Barack Obama.

Lewis has been a staunch supporter of Clinton, traveling the nation promoting her candidacy. But after his congressional district voted 3-to-1 for Obama, Lewis was on the heat seat and began sending signals that he was looking to make a change.

"Something's happening in America, something some of us did not see coming," Lewis told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "Barack Obama has tapped into something that is extraordinary."

This decision has to be a very difficult one for Clinton because she and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have been very close to Lewis.

Obama's response to Lewis' change of heart? ""John Lewis is an American hero and a giant of the Civil Rights Movement, and I am deeply honored to have his support,” he said.

Question of the Day: What do you make of Rep. John Lewis switching his allegiance from Clinton to Obama?

Obama pushed on Farrakhan statements during debate

There was a lot of drama and substance coming out of the Democratic presidential debate last night in Cleveland, but it seems that a lot of the conversation this morning is about Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan.

During last night's debate, NBC's Tim Russert asked Obama about positive comments made about him on Sunday during his annual Nation of Islam Saviours' Day address at McCormick Place in Chicago.

In his speech, Farrakhan never officially endorsed Obama, but he did have a number of positive things to say.

That was the genesis of last night's discussion.

We discussed it for two hours on my radio show this morning, and I've gotten a bunch of queries about it.

To me, it's such a non-issue.

First, Farrakhan made his comments about Obama at a Farrakhan event. This wasn't like the conservative radio show host snapping at an event for Sen. John McCain. No one can control what Farrakhan says.

Obama said he didn't seek out the endorsement and Farrakhan has no role in the campaign.

Lastly, why does Obama have to denounce comments made by Farrakhan years ago? He did, of course, but should he have to>

If the shoe were on the other foot, I think it would be stupid for Clinton to have to apologize for stuff by her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

In fact, President Clinton has positive things to say - some called it an endorsement - of the 1995 Million Man March and the 2005 Millions More Movement. Who came up with both of those events? Louis Farrakhan. Who was the keynote speaker of both? Louis Farrakhan.

OK, so jam him up about that; not Sen. Clinton.

Obama answered the question, and it has no bearing on this race. Clinton shouldn't have to answer to any comments made by someone who likes her but has no role in the campaign.

To spend 10 minutes on a Farrakhan question, and NO time on cutbacks in students loans, gentrification, or an in-depth analysis of the the housing woes in America, shows that maybe a lot of us focus on the non-substantive issues facing America.

Farrakhan discussion from Feb. 27 Democratic debate

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Obama, one of the things in a campaign is that you have to react to unexpected developments.

On Sunday, the headline in your hometown paper, Chicago Tribune: "Louis Farrakhan Backs Obama for President at Nation of Islam Convention in Chicago." Do you accept the support of Louis Farrakhan?

SEN. OBAMA: You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments. I think that they are unacceptable and reprehensible. I did not solicit this support. He expressed pride in an African-American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can't censor him, but it is not support that I sought. And we're not doing anything, I assure you, formally or informally with Minister Farrakhan.

MR. RUSSERT: Do you reject his support?

SEN. OBAMA: Well, Tim, you know, I can't say to somebody that he can't say that he thinks I'm a good guy. (Laughter.) You know, I -- you know, I -- I have been very clear in my denunciations of him and his past statements, and I think that indicates to the American people what my stance is on those comments.

MR. RUSSERT: The problem some voters may have is, as you know, Reverend Farrakhan called Judaism "gutter religion."

OBAMA: Tim, I think -- I am very familiar with his record, as are the American people. That's why I have consistently denounced it.

This is not something new. This is something that -- I live in Chicago. He lives in Chicago. I've been very clear, in terms of me believing that what he has said is reprehensible and inappropriate. And I have consistently distanced myself from him.

RUSSERT: The title of one of your books, "Audacity of Hope," you acknowledge you got from a sermon from Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the head of the Trinity United Church. He said that Louis Farrakhan "epitomizes greatness."

He said that he went to Libya in 1984 with Louis Farrakhan to visit with Moammar Gadhafi and that, when your political opponents found out about that, quote, "your Jewish support would dry up quicker than a snowball in Hell."

RUSSERT: What do you do to assure Jewish-Americans that, whether it's Farrakhan's support or the activities of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, your pastor, you are consistent with issues regarding Israel and not in any way suggesting that Farrakhan epitomizes greatness?

OBAMA: Tim, I have some of the strongest support from the Jewish community in my hometown of Chicago and in this presidential campaign. And the reason is because I have been a stalwart friend of Israel's. I think they are one of our most important allies in the region, and I think that their security is sacrosanct, and that the United States is in a special relationship with them, as is true with my relationship with the Jewish community.

And the reason that I have such strong support is because they know that not only would I not tolerate anti-Semitism in any form, but also because of the fact that what I want to do is rebuild what I consider to be a historic relationship between the African-American community and the Jewish community.

You know, I would not be sitting here were it not for a whole host of Jewish Americans, who supported the civil rights movement and helped to ensure that justice was served in the South. And that coalition has frayed over time around a whole host of issues, and part of my task in this process is making sure that those lines of communication and understanding are reopened.

But, you know, the reason that I have such strong support in the Jewish community and have historically -- it was true in my U.S. Senate campaign and it's true in this presidency -- is because the people who know me best know that I consistently have not only befriended the Jewish community, not only have I been strong on Israel, but, more importantly, I've been willing to speak out even when it is not comfortable.

When I was -- just last point I would make -- when I was giving -- had the honor of giving a sermon at Ebenezer Baptist Church in conjunction with Martin Luther King's birthday in front of a large African-American audience, I specifically spoke out against anti- Semitism within the African-American community. And that's what gives people confidence that I will continue to do that when I'm president of the United States.

WILLIAMS: Senator...

CLINTON: I just want to add something here, because I faced a similar situation when I ran for the Senate in 2000 in New York. And in New York, there are more than the two parties, Democratic and Republican. And one of the parties at that time, the Independence Patty, was under the control of people who were anti-Semitic, anti- Israel. And I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. I said that it would not be anything I would be comfortable with. And it looked as though I might pay a price for that. But I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory and untrue charges against either Israel or Jewish people in our country.

And, you know, I was willing to take that stand, and, you know, fortunately the people of New York supported me and I won. But at the time, I thought it was more important to stand on principle and to reject the kind of conditions that went with support like that.

RUSSERT: Are you suggesting Senator Obama is not standing on principle?

CLINTON: No. I'm just saying that you asked specifically if he would reject it. And there's a difference between denouncing and rejecting. And I think when it comes to this sort of, you know, inflammatory -- I have no doubt that everything that Barack just said is absolutely sincere. But I just think, we've got to be even stronger. We cannot let anyone in any way say these things because of the implications that they have, which can be so far reaching.

OBAMA: Tim, I have to say I don't see a difference between denouncing and rejecting. There's no formal offer of help from Minister Farrakhan that would involve me rejecting it. But if the word "reject" Senator Clinton feels is stronger than the word "denounce," then I'm happy to concede the point, and I would reject and denounce.

CLINTON: Good. Good. Excellent.

(APPLAUSE)

WILLIAMS: Rare audience outburst on the agreement over rejecting and renouncing.

Top Clinton official: Blacks will come around to Hillary if she wins the nomination

Harold Ickes is a no-holds-barred campaign official who will do anything for his candidate to win the Democratic nomination.

And if Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are close in delegates, he says he will push hard for superdelegates to choose the former First Lady, even if Obama is leading her in pledged delegates.

In a story by Roger Simon on Politico.com, Ickes is asked if such a plan of action will lead to a fractured Democratic Party, especially among African Americans, and he basically says, "No big deal."

“There will be some hurt feelings initially,” Ickes said. “But in a very tight election, Barack Obama will swing in behind Hillary Clinton and black people will vote for her and she will be able to bring in Hispanic voters also.”

Harold, you might think you know black people. But as someone who has a radio show targeting black folks in Chicago (WVON-AM); a blog on a black female website (Essence.com); a commentator for a black cable network (TV One); run three black newspapers (Houston Defender, Dallas Weekly, Chicago Defender); a black website (BlackAmericaWeb.com) been a news editor of a black national magazine (Savoy Magazine); and filed reports for a black radio network (American Urban Radio Networks), I know my people far better than you.

And I can guarantee you that if Sen. Obama is leading among pledged delegates, and the superdelegates throw the election to Sen. Clinton, she can bank on a loss in November.

Why? Her negatives are already at high levels, ranging between 42 and 44 percent. That means that she can ill-afford any slippage in any key demographic.

Clinton can't afford to lose even 3 to 5 percent of black voters, who are the base of the Democratic Party. If she loses that amount, she loses the election.

Black turnout is critical. A disenchanted black electorate could stay at home, thus having the same effect. I've even gotten calls from yellow dog Democrats, many who are still angry with Bill Clinton's references to Rev. Jesse Jackson when Obama won the South Carolina primary, who have said they will vote for McCain before they vote for her.

These are folks who are also able to write pretty big checks, so they are no joke.

I got an email Monday night from a prominent and well-paid African American woman who said: "My 16-year-old, the one who 3 months ago had nothing to say or do with politics, now says if Clinton wins she's campaigning for Ralph Nader."

This is not folks who are overemotional about Obama. The view that the Clintons will stoop to any level is strong, and I would not misjudge this if I'm Ickes.

My suggestion to Clinton? You better move ahead of Obama among pledged delegates or you will face a crisis unlike any other you have ever encountered. Yes, even THAT crisis.

Harold, you might think you know black people, but I know them a little better than you. This will be a no-win situation for Hillary Clinton. So you better win it fair and square, and not depend on the superdelegates, or there will be hell to pay, and the Democrats will guarantee a McCain presidency.

Question of the Day: If Obama leads Clinton among pledged delegates, but hasn't received the 2,025, and the superdelegates put Clinton over the top, will you support her in November?

What is the state of the black union?

The Tavis Smiley event is being hosted as we speak in New Orleans. Are you there? Are you watching on C-SPAN?

Share your thoughts about what is being said.

We would love to hear from you!

Michelle Obama's patriotism questioned

In the age of the Internet, any comment can all of a sudden become an international crisis as bloggers, talk show hosts and others seize on it and becomes larger than it is.

That's what Michelle Obama is going through over a comment she made in Milwaukee on Monday that has gotten the super-patriotic in America all riled up.

"For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country," Obama said. "Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change."

That comment about being really proud for the first time as an adult took off like wildfire, aided by Cindy McCain, the wife of Republican presidential contender John McCain, who said later that day, "I have, and always will be, proud of my country."

The Obama camp didn't really do much about the comment for the first 48 hours, but by Wednesday, had to get Michelle to further explain what she meant.

"What I was clearly talking about was that I'm proud in how Americans are engaging in the political process," she told WJAR-TV. "For the first time in my lifetime, I'm seeing people rolling up their sleeves in a way that I haven't seen and really trying to figure this out — and that's the source of pride that I was talking about."

Was it a big deal? Nope. But remember, in the post-Sept. 11 world, patriotism has gone overboard with hyper folks waiting to declare anyone who isn't as strong on the issue as them out of step with American thought. And as a potential First Lady, a possible first African American First Lady, the wife of the guy who they all keep saying a Muslim - even though he isn't - Michelle's comments will be studied and analyzed more so than those of Cindy McCain.

First, I heard the comment and got it right away. But the Obama campaign team is going to have to do a much better job in being aware of the perception of certain comments and not shrug them off.

Remember the comments Sen. Barack Obama made about Ronald Reagan during the week of the Nevada caucus? Team Obama didn't see the big deal. Then they had to spend three to four days having to deal with the backlash, and that took time away from the message.

But an interesting twist to the Michelle Obama patriotism story were the comments of FOX talk show host Bill O'Reilly.

On his radio show while discussing the controversy, he said: "I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that's how she really feels -- that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever -- then that's legit. We'll track it down."

Was Bill slamming Michelle? Nope. In fact, he was saying that he didn't see all the fuss. My PROBLEM is why does he have to use the word lynching?

We all know the history of lynching in America, and when use it in that context. But I just think folks need to be sensitive to such words. And that includes Bill O'Reilly.

It was just last month that the Golf Channel suspended anchor Kelly Tilghman for two weeks for saying during a live broadcast that what younger golfers should do to Tiger Woods is "lynch him in a back alley."

Tiger said Kelly is a friend and meant no harm, but it's about the choice of words that we use. I'm always cognizant of such things when I'm on the air because they can be interpreted by people in different ways.

Yet using a word like lynching should cause someone to say, wait a minute, maybe I ought not say that before opening my big mouth.

I'm sure Bill will get all defensive and slam the PC police, but denying the history of lynching and what it means is nothing to scoff at or blow off.

No spin zone: Clinton camp knows they got beaten badly

Election night is always the time for aides from all political camps to spin the election results as best as they can.

Normally, our email boxes are flooded with emails from the team of Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Last night, nothing.

No, really. NOTHING. No statements. No spin. Eerily quiet.

Earlier, the Obama campaign said the Wisconsin primary would be a "no excuses" night for Clinton. They were right.

Her camp didn't blame it on Wisconsin being a red state. A small state. A caucus state. A black state.

At the end of the day, the Clinton camp had to accept the reality that their candidate got beaten to the pulp, and people have more respect for you when you take a butt kicking and not try to explain it away.

Obama beats Clinton in Hawaii, scores 10th straight victory

Sen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and raised there as a child, and that clearly showed as he blew Sen. Hillary Clinton out in that state.

With 100 percent of the precincts reporting, Obama won the Democratic caucus with 28,347, or 76 percent, to Clinton's 8,835 votes, or 24 percent.

The race now moves to Texas, and with the latest CNN poll showing they are virtually tied there, Clinton faces an uphill battle to stave off Obama and stay in this race.

Obama beats Clinton in Wisconsin

CNN calls the Wisconsin primary for Sen. Barack Obama, which means that he has locked up his ninth consecutive victory. If he wins Hawaii as expected, he will have won 10 straight races against Sen. Hillary Clinton, putting him in an undeniably strong position heading into the March 4 primaries in Ohio and Texas.

According to the latest CNN poll, Obama and Clinton are virtually tied in the Lone Star State, and even supporters of Clinton say she MUST win Texas and Ohio in order to continue in the campaign.

Three months ago, Clinton was beating by Obama in the polls by 20 points. That all changed beginning last month.

The state set up well for Wisconsin. Lots of women, blue collar workers and older voters. But it appears that Obama's momentum is carrying him to victory.

The Obama camp called tonight's win a "no excuses" one for the Clinton campaign, which has offered multiple reasons for Obama victories in the past several weeks.

Howard Wolfson, the communications director for Clinton, emailed me this tonight: "Camp Obama predicted a big victory here two weeks ago. They knew that this was favorable terrain."

When I pushed back saying that it was supposed to be a state made for her, he replied: "I have been very explicit on and off the record about WI (Wisconsin) being tough for us."

So, what does Clinton do now?

Will Obama win his 9th straight Democratic primary?

Wisconsin has been a major battleground state and Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been duking it out.

Both have been slashing and dashing, with Clinton hitting Obama hard on not debating, and calling him nothing but a speechmaker. Obama fired back saying she wants to return to the politics of old.

So what will tonight hold? On the Democratic side, voters are going to the polls in Wisconsin and Hawaii, although we won't know a thing until 3 a.m. EST. That's when the voting gets started there.

On the Republican side, it's all about Wisconsin.

I'm holding it down at the CNN Election Center in New York.

Roland on the 700 Club at 9:45 a.m. EST today

I'll be on live today on the 700 Club discussing my book, "Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith."

To read more, click here.

Roland, TV One win NAACP Image Award for Obama interview

I was so doggone busy last week that I forgot to share some thoughts about the 39th annual NAACP Image Awards.

The event was held at The Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles, and it was packed with stars.

Yours truly was among the throng of invited guests by virtue of my TV One nomination for Outstanding News/Information (Series or Special) for "In Conversation: The Senator Barack Obama Interview."

We were competing against BET's "American Gangsters"; two CNN specials, including Soledad O'Brien's "MLK Papers"; and a breast cancer special by Good Morning America.

When I walked into the Shrine with my lovely wife, Jacquie, around 4:15 p.m., a brother told me, "Hey, congratulations." I thought he was referring to the nomination.

"No, you won!"

"Say what?" I replied.

It was at that point that I went looking for someone from the NAACP to confirm the news.

Hill Harper and I were chatting and he took me backstage to see if we could find out. But no one seemed to know.

I went back to my seat, and talked to my wife before deciding to go holla at Tom Joyner and his wife, Donna Richardson Joyner.

Tom asked me, "What are you doing here, covering this?"

"No. I'm nominated," I said.

"No, you won!" said a voice behind Tom.

It was BET President Reggie Hudlin, my homeboy. Before he got the BET gig, we used to instant message three to four nights a week about all kind of crazy media ideas!

"What?" I told Reggie.

"You won. I should know. You beat me!" said a laughing Hudlin.

I turned around and Radio One founder Cathy Hughes was congratulating me on the win.

Then Reg says, "See, even you get your news from BET."

Now I gotta admit, that was funny (If you don't get the joke, you better ask somebody!).

It felt good to get the win since it was TV One's first-ever nomination, which I shared with the production company that did the work, Filtered Water Productions.

The award was presented during the pre-show so we are going to have to wait for the trophy. But I can tell you there are a lot of folks in Silver Springs, Maryland who are happy this morning!

It was great to mix and mingle, and folks, the topic of conversation was the election and Clinton/Obama (I don't think there were many McCain lovers in the room!)

Among those in attendance: a baldheaded Denzel Washington; Angela Bassett; "The Unit's" Regina Taylor; Don Cheadle; Ruby Dee; Aretha Franklin; Wendell Pierce from "The Wire"; Blair Underwood; the aformentioned Harper; Tyler Perry; D. L. Hughley (he hosted the show); Indie. Arie; Tracy Morgan; Janet Jackson (when she won, mouths dropped open to see the hour glass figure after dropping all that weight. She was looking fabulous, but let's just say there are some places where the weight will never leave, and a bruh ain't complaining!); Herbie Hancock; Terry Crews (that boy is a fool!) and so many others.

Stevie Wonder was inducted into the NAACP Image Awards Hall of Fame, and when he referenced Obama, the room erupted. But when he mentioned Clinton, there was a smattering of applause. Of course, Stevie ended his speech by saying, "Yes we can!" That happens to be the slogan of the Obama campaign, which uses his "Signed, Sealed, Delivered" and its primary theme song.

The official after party was at the Beverly Hilton Hotel, and we had a blast. I ran into my boy Ed Gordon, and we talked a little politics. We also chatted with Rockmond Dunbar, who was telling me and the wifey about his house drama in Chicago where the new crib just suffered some busted pipes.

It has been cold in the Windy City as of late, but busted pipes in a new house? Bruh was not happy!

I want to also give a shout out to my homegirl Larcine Bland, a big wig at Blockbuster. Thanks for going up to your room and hooking me and Rockmond up with the free movie passes!

All in all it was a great week, topped off by the Aretha Franklin concert on Friday night at the Nokia Center. She was on her game, but Aretha is crazy! (We went to the concert with Bev White, a longtime reporter/anchor for KNBC in Los Angeles, and her husband, Xavier).

She was sent a batch of hot dogs from Pink's, a famous joint in LA. So the Queen of Soul - can somebody please tell Beyonce not to get that twisted?! - passed the dogs out to some audience members! LOL

Then for the second half of the show she wore a Pink's black cap with pink lettering, along with her ballroom gown. Too wild.

Wifey and I ended the weekend by attending a dinner party in Beverly Hills for Isaiah Washington and his fabu wife, Jenisa Marie. They celebrated their wedding anniversary on February 14 (the four of us had dinner on February 13, my wife's birthday).

So sure, I still had to work (man, doing a Chicago radio show at 4 a.m. in LA ain't no fun!) but there was still lots of time to play.

OK, now back to politics. :-)

Julian Bond survives major challenge, re-elected NAACP board chairman

Earlier this week, NAACP Chairman Julian Bond told CNN's Carol Costello that he didn't think there would be much fallout from the 64-member board over his letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean over coming up with a solution to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations.

He couldn't have been more wrong.

The NAACP board met today in New York and it was hot!

My board sources said board members came armed to take down Bond, and they almost succeeded.

Sources said Bond was "running scared trying to assess the votes but board members are avoiding them."

The meeting was described as "super intense" and forces for and against Bond were "lobbying hard."

"The room is packed!" I was told. "I have never seen this many people in attendance."

One of the reasons Bond wanted to stay on was because next year marks the 100th anniversary of the NAACP, and he has always wanted to be chairman during this centennial celebration. Bond told me last year that after his two-year term concluded after the centennial in 2010, he would retire from the board.

Eventually, California NAACP President Alice Huffman ran against Bond for the chairman's position.

Bond has taken a lot of heat for the Dean letter, not only because it put the NAACP in the middle of a Democratic Party battle, but also because he didn't run the idea by the board, nor its executive committee.

"I'm the chairman of the board, I'm empowered to speak for the NAACP between meetings of the board of directors," he told CNN's Costello. "We'll have a board meeting in New York this weekend, and we'll see whether or not there's any fallout from this. I doubt there is. I think most people support it."

My sources said NAACP big wigs in Michigan and Florida were not at all in favor of the letter, and were outraged that Bond decided to move on his own.

So after all of the speeches, angry back and forth between folks on both sides, the board voted by secret ballot, and Bond - a civil rights icon who some have said saved the NAACP in recent years by virtue of his leadership, while others say his micromanaging was responsible for the departure after a year of president and CEO Bruce Gordon - beat Huffman 31-20.

Also re-elected was board vice chair Rosalind Brock, who was targeted by some board members for removal.

The NAACP still has a problem in that they don't have a president and CEO, which has been held down by Dennis Hayes.

I've been told that the NAACP has a hand full of candidates who they are looking at to fill the job.

Rev. Al Sharpton's letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean

Dear Governor Dean,

I write this letter as a former Democratic candidate for President of the United States and a civil rights leader who has fought his entire life for fairness and justice for all people regardless of the color of their skin. I firmly believe that changing the rules now, and seating delegates from Florida and Michigan at this point would not only violate the Democratic party's rules of fairness, but also would be a grave injustice.

As former Presidential candidates we both know that, whether we liked them or not, we adhered to the rules set forth by the Democratic party to select its nominee for president. For example, I would have much preferred starting the nominating process with caucuses and primaries in South Carolina and Washington D.C. than Iowa and New Hampshire. Nonetheless, I knew the rules, abided by them, and ultimately accepted the consequences. Changing the rules in the middle of a presidential contest is patently unfair both to the candidates (including Senator Edwards) and to Democratic voters everywhere.

Some have said that not seating delegations from Florida and Michigan disenfranchises Democratic voters -- especially African American voters -- from those two states. That claim, if true, should have been made many months ago before the decision was made to strip these states of their delegates, and, once the decision was made, it should have been vigorously objected to and contested by those who felt it disenfranchised voters. To raise that claim now smacks of politics in its form most raw and undercuts the moral authority behind such an argument.

As a civil rights leader who is neutral in this presidential primary season and who highly respects both remaining Democratic candidates, I think we have a responsibility to protect both candidates from charges that the process was tainted so that our eventual nominee does not start the general election campaign under a cloud. Clearly, the justifiably proud and intense passions of each candidate's supporters will be on full display in the months leading up to the convention. However, the Democratic Party and independent voices within must temper over enthusiasm by either side and the party must be resolute in ensuring that there is one set of rules by which we select our nominee.

In Progress,

Reverend Al Sharpton

Mary Frances Berry responds to my column on the NAACP letter to Howard Dean

It was a long night for me and I was unable to update on the website. But here is a series of emails from Mary Frances Berry to me regarding my column about Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP.

-----Original Message-----
From: Roland Martin
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 1:21 PM
To: Mary Frances Berry
Subject: Roland S. Martin

Mary,

It is my understanding that you helped Julian Bond write the letter that was sent to DNC chair Howard Dean regarding the Michigan and Florida delegates.

I was told that you, Bond and Wade Henderson worked on the letter on
Friday.

I'm seeking to confirm if that is the case. I'm on deadline for my Essence.com blog and CNN, so please let me know as soon as possible.
______________________________________________________________
From: Mary Frances Berry
Reply-To: Mary Frances Berry
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:56:31 -0500
To: Roland Martin
Subject: RE: Roland S. Martin

Roland my views are stated in the letter Roger wilkins and I wrote to Howard Dean. I'm concerned about two things: possible disenfranchisement and conflict at the convention no matter who is the nominee (assuming Obama) for now; conflicted conventions end up in defeat. What Julian said in his letter , which I read, about feelings of disenfranchisement I share; the point is nobody can tell people how to feel and if they feel screwed they'll make trouble.
______________________________________________________________

From: Roland Martin
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:51 PM
To: Mary Frances Berry
Subject: Re: Roland S. Martin

So why wasn't the concerns addressed when Michigan and Florida chose to pass the state laws, thereby putting them in jeopardy? That's the point I've
always had.

Those states knew the delegates were going to get taken. The DNC isn't at
fault, it's the ridiculous moves of the states.

Roland S. Martin
______________________________________________________________

From: Mary Frances Berry
Friday, February 15, 2008 4:07 AM
To: Roland S. Martin

Roland I resent you saying I didn't respond to you when I did. Further I
pointed you to the letter I wrote with Roger as to my reasons. All of this
back and forth and attempting to finger people makes great tv commentary but it doesn't avoid a fight at the convention which is reminiscent of other
fights when the dems lost afterwards. I told you that in my e-mail
yesterday; again I wouldn't have responded to you if I had known you were
goiung to pretend I hadn't and I didn't write Julian's letter. so keep on
lying on CNN and in your blog. I thought you were better than that.
______________________________________________________________

From: Mary Frances Berry
Friday, February 15, 2008 4:23 AM
To: Roland S. Martin

Roland by the way what makes you disrespect Julian Bond so much as to attack him because he didn't think of doing something at one time and now that its getting closer thinks of it after complaints from his membership. Julian has paid his dues; is nothing sacred? I guess not.
______________________________________________________________

From: Roland S. Martin
Friday, February 15, 2008 4:45 AM
To: Roland S. Martin

Mary,

I fully get paying dues. And I have, on so many occasions, defended and supported the NAACP, but I am very clear about speaking truth to power, even when it's friends.

I've talked to a number of board members who said they were unaware and outraged the letter because of the ambiguous language, as well as them not being aware of it being sent.

Several board members and state presidents and even members approached me last night at the NAACP Image Awards and weighed in on the letter, saying it caused a lot of confusion as to the intent.

And I fully stand by the position that the NAACP has come to this party late. From day one, I have been angered by the perception that the DNC is disenfranchising the citizens of Michigan and Florida. No, the people who did that are those state legislators and governors.

Where was the NAACP then? Why didn't the NAACP rise up and say, "Don't you dare pass this measure or you are going to leave out the people of these states to have their voices heard?" The NAACP was missing in action when that happened.

Oh, sure, NO ONE thought this race was going to be this close. No one thought that these delegates were really going to come into play. But anyone could have seen that this game of chicken that the states were playing with the DNC would have serious ramifications.

Now what I didn't get into was the fact the within the DNC, there was an effort by the group to stop the party's long-standing support of affirmative action because gays and lesbians wanted certain timetables to be instituted for their benefit. That led to a major fight within the party, and the DNC almost abandoned their support for affirmative action. Donna Brazile was a fierce foe of certain timetables they wanted to impose, and who came to her aid? The Rev. Jesse Jackson. I was informed that the NAACP refused to say a word out of fear of alienating members of the gay and lesbian community.

If you think I'm wrong, reach out to Donna or Rev. Jackson and ask them. Now if it's the NAACP, how do you abandon affirmative action out of fear of ticking off gays and lesbians? Who are your constituents?

I have written MANY columns defending the NAACP. I have used my voice on TV One, CNN and my radio show to defend the organization, and when they were unfairly targeted by commentators, set some folks straight. And as a founding member of the NAACP chapter at Texas A&M University, will continue to do so.

And I respect your work, Mary Frances Berry, but when I see something wrong, I will say something. There is no way I'll be silent at such an important juncture. It is in moments like this where I lean on the advice given to me by one of my mentors, the late Vernon Jarrett, who always told me to not allow my voice to be silenced by family.

And like it or not, in his email to me, Julian Bond slammed Obama for not standing up for the people of Michigan and Florida when the rules were set. And neither did Julian Bond or the NAACP. That is irrefutable.

Thank you.
______________________________________________________________

From: Roland S. Martin
Friday, February 15, 2008 4:48 AM
To: Mary Frances Berry

The piece was written and emailed before you responded.

I'm in LA where I was attending the NAACP Image Awards and was unable to send an addendum to the piece. I left the hotel room in the early afternoon and didn't return until after the after party late last night.

What I will do is send an email this AM to my folks at CNN.com to see if they can add an update at the bottom of the email.

My blog will be updated now with your three emails.

Thanks.

Roland S. Martin

NAACP’s Bond late to the game regarding Democratic delegate battle

Hey, folks! This is my nationally syndicated column for this week.

NAACP Chairman Julian Bond’s decision to weigh in on the Democratic Party’s conundrum when it comes to seating delegates from Michigan and Florida has created a firestorm of discussion on blogs and talk shows, and frankly, I’m still unclear as to what his intent was.

Sure, he and others have the freedom to weigh in on the issue. But why be a Julian-come-lately now, when the nation’s oldest and largest civil rights organization said nothing when the initial Democratic National Committee rules were made?

The DNC was clear: only four states – Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada, will vote before February 5. The first two didn’t like the competition, but after hearing criticism that ethnic and geographic voices were not playing a part in determining the nominee, the party moved up Nevada because of the Latino population and it’s a western state, and South Carolina because of it’s black population and it’s a southern state.

DNC officials dropped the hammer and said if anyone else moved up, they would be severely punished. But the legislatures in Florida and Michigan, along with their governors, figured they could strong arm the parties to bend to their will, so they voted, approved and then signed into law bills to move up the primaries.

Anyone with a brain could see that if the DNC went through with their threat, voters there would be disenfranchised. Had the NAACP and other groups gone after the state legislators then, we wouldn’t be in this position now. And with Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton so tight among delegates, the decision not to fight the actions in Michigan and Florida is causing all kinds of problems.

Obama’s position has been that the states broke the rules, all the candidates agreed not to campaign there, and the DNC should enforce the rules that all sides agreed to. But Clinton is leading the charge to seat the delegates, especially since she “won” both states, even though she was often quoted as saying the results won’t mean a thing because the election will not count.

But since she didn’t knock Obama out of the race on Super Tuesday, and has since lost eight caucuses and primaries, she desperately needs those delegates, and her camp told the New York Times in the February 14 edition they will do everything they can to get them seated.

This brings us back to Bond, a veteran of the civil rights movement who has pretty much run the group since the messy departure of Bruce Gordon as president and CEO this time last year.

In his February 8 letter, Bond said that he was worried that voters in both states “could ultimately have their votes completely discounted if they are not assigned delegate representation for the Democratic National Convention.”

When the story was picked up the Associated Press, it was reported that he wanted the states given to Clinton and then seated in her favor. NAACP officials told me that was not the case, and he was not advocating on behalf of one candidate or another.

In an email to me, Bond explained his reasoning behind the letter.

“When these rules were set it was suspected at the time that they would be discriminatory for states with large African American populations. It seemed a harsh rule to disenfranchise millions of our voters just to appease the thousands of white voters in Iowa and New Hampshire,” he said.

“Party rules never stated that candidates had to take their names off of the ballot as was the case in Michigan. This was something that the Iowa and New Hampshire state parties imposed on the candidates in a bidding war to show their allegiance to the first-in the-nation ‘white’ primaries.

“Both Iowa and New Hampshire strongly OPPOSED the addition of South Carolina and Nevada as early primary states. They fought the Black and Hispanic Caucus tooth and nail to stop this addition of states with Black and Brown populations having a greater say in the nomination process. They lost and in retaliation made the candidates sign a pledge to them - not the DNC - to not campaign there and not have their names on the ballot. Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich and Chris Dodd refused to sign this pledge and left their names on the ballot. Clinton did not go into Florida until after the polls closed keeping her pledge. The Obama campaign miscalculated on this issue and should have stood with Michigan and Florida given their strong African American populations.

“Had Obama won these states I am sure many people would be supporting this change in the rules.”

As someone who has opposed the leverage of Iowa and New Hampshire, I’m in agreement that they should not always be first. Yet that has nothing to do with today, and Bond knows it.

What is unclear is why he waited so long (he also didn’t notify the NAACP’s 64-member board of the letter) and why, according to my NAACP sources, he wrote the letter with help from Mary Frances Berry, former head of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, as well as Wade Henderson, CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

The letter was hurriedly drafted on Friday, as evidence by the three misspelled words in it. It’s not clear why there was such a sense of urgency to get it out, but the fact that it came to light on Tuesday night when Obama was steamrolling Clinton in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia has some conspiracy-minded bloggers making all kinds of assertions.

I have called and emailed Berry and Henderson for their response, but none of those have been returned.

The NAACP had an opportunity to speak for disenfranchised voters before this mess was created. That’s when they should have weighed in. Their actions now look suspicious, and Bond has no one to blame but himself as the de facto leader of what once was a relevant organization.

Copy of Sen. Barack Obama letter to Tavis Smiley

February 13, 2008
 
 
Mr. Tavis Smiley
President and CEO
The Smiley Group  
3870 Crenshaw Boulevard
Suite 391
Los Angeles, CA 90008
 
Dear Tavis,   
 
Thank you for the invitation to participate in the 2008 State of the Black Union forum in New Orleans, Louisiana February 21-23. The exchange of ideas raised at this annual symposium are invaluable as our nation strives to address the critical issues facing not just African Americans, but Americans of every race, background and political party.
 
I especially commend you for hosting this dialogue in New Orleans. On the eve of the Louisiana primary, I visited this great city for the fifth time since declaring my candidacy to share policy proposals for rebuilding the Gulf Coast so that we never experience another Hurricane Katrina. On February 9, I was deeply humbled to win the Louisiana primary with 86 percent of the African American vote and a 14 point lead among all voters who said they were adversely affected by Hurricane Katrina.
 
Uniting our country and creating a national constituency for fundamental change is why I am running for President of the United States. We have come a long way in this race, but we still have a long road ahead. In the final stretch, I will be on the campaign trail everyday in states like Ohio, Texas and Wisconsin talking directly with voters about the causes that are at the heart of my campaign and the State of the Black Union forum such as affordable healthcare, housing, economic opportunity, civil rights and foreign policy. I am committed to touching every voter, and working to earn their vote.       

That is why with regret, I am not able to attend the forum. I understand that you have declined the campaign’s request to have Michelle Obama speak on my behalf. I ask that you reconsider. Michelle is a powerful voice for the type of real change America is hungry for. No one knows my record or my passion for leading America in a new direction more than Michelle Obama.

Tavis, this is our movement and our time. I look forward to working closely with you throughout this election. Thank you for your continued support.   
 
Sincerely,

Barack Obama

Tavis says no to Michelle Obama speaking at State of the Black Union

Looks like it's either the candidates or no one.

Tavis Smiley, convener of the State of the Black Union on Feb. 23 in New Orleans, has turned down the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama to send Michelle Obama to address those who will gather there.

Sen. Hillary Clinton accepted his invite and will speak, but after several days in which Smiley said he would blast those who didn't attend his event, and then the Obama campaign choosing to keep the candidate fighting for votes in Texas and Ohio, this pretty much brings this issue to a close.

In his commentary today on The Tom Joyner Morning Show, Tavis said that prior to receiving a letter yesterday, he was never "officially" offered Michelle Obama as a surrogate.

But my sources tell me that two individuals VERY close to Tavis discussed Michelle with him, and he told both of them, "No."

So even though he said something different today, he had been asked about Michelle and said no.

We'll try to get the audio link to his comments on TJMS so you can hear for yourself.

Here is a rough transcript of comments Michelle Obama made yesterday on the Michael Baisden Show Wednesday. "MO" is Michelle Obama and "BO" is Barack Obama.

MO: I think that BO and I both have a tremendous amount of respect for Tavis and the work he has done and most people have come to know BO’s life work and advancing the principles and the base of the covenant- and he works to eradicate the opportunity gap and that all kids have education and health care you name it it has been a part of his platform- we believe in what Tavis is doing and people know that we are at a critical juncture – he is in a position that no one could have been anticipated but it is not over- he have spent every minute spending time reaching voters that don’t know him. This race is going to determine the outcome of this entire race and so I am in support of his decision to spend his time trying to reach these voters- I offered to attend the state of the black union- Tavis says that my attendance and participation would be inappropriate and I respect that. But BO has to spend his time becoming the next prez of the US.

BAISDEN: You and I love Tavis for what he has done- what do you need the family to know about the Tavis situation

MO: I think people should know that Tavis has been a friend and his principles are at the heart of who we are- I don’t think anyone can doubt that BO has been working hard at the equity- we are at a point where if BO doesn’t do well in these remaining contests then it will switch right back- we need to make sure that he is spending every second reaching out to voters in texas and ohio. I just got back in town and going back out on Monday and Friday- I haven’t seen BO in a couple weeks but that is what it takes. The fact he has won 8 in a row is a testament to working hard and focused.

BAISDEN: I have known Tavis for years- I am going to try to reach out to him if I can- if you are listening please iron this thing out- I respect you don’t want Michelle to be there- but we have bigger fish to fry.

MO: This is an amazing time in our country’s history and we wouldn’t be here without the work Tavis has done- we have a tremendous amount of respect- I don’t think that anyone would disagree with that, but now that we are here we cant miss this opportunity so what happens in Texas and Ohio and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin will make or break this.

BAISDEN: I believe that everybody understands, I want to thank you for coming on the show.

MO: We love him and respect him- I would love to come to the summit, maybe not this year since it is inappropriate but maybe other years I hope the invitation is open

BAISDEN: Did you realize that you are growing in popularity- you have done a great job in representing this man

MO: Well thank you Michael, I believe in this brother and I believe in us- people have not let us down I am so proud of my country and so proud of my people- we are not there yet look at here, we are almost there.

Question of the Day: Was Tavis Smiley right or wrong to reject Michelle Obama to address the State of the Black Union in place of her husband, Sen. Barack Obama?

Julian Bond on discrimination and the vote

From: "Julian Bond"
Subj: FW:
Date: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:24 pm
Size: 5K
To: "'Roland Martin'"

When these rules were set it was suspected at the time that they would be discriminatory for states with large African American populations. It seemed a harsh rule to disenfranchise millions of our voters just to appease the thousands of white voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Party rules never stated that candidateshad to take their names off of the ballot as was the case in Michigan. This was something that the Iowa and New Hampshire state parties imposed on the candidates in a bidding war to show their allegiance to the first-in the-nation"white" primaries.

Both Iowa and New Hampshire strongly OPPOSED the addition of South Carolina and Nevada as early primary states. They fought theBlack and Hispanic Caucus tooth and nail to stop this addition ofstates with Black and Brown populations having a greater say in the nomination process. They lost and in retaliation made the candidates sign a pledge to them - not the DNC - to not campaign there and not have their names on the ballot. Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinichand Chris Dodd refused to sign this pledge and left their names on the ballot. Clinton did not go into Florida until after the polls closed keeping her pledge.

The Obama campaign miscalculated on this issue and should have stood with Michigan and Florida given their strong African American populations. Had Obama won these states I am sure many people would be supporting this change in the rules.

Julian Bond

Watch NAACP-Democratic delegate story on CNN's The Situation Room at 5 p.m. EST!

Carol Costello will be doing the story.

Here is the transcript of what Bond told her for her story:

"I thought it wrong, particularly for Florida Democratic voters, that they had become the victims of their Republican legislature and the victims of an attempt by iowa and new hampshire to minimize the effect of these states with heavy minority populations. And there are alternatives to just simply excluding the delegates. Those states could have caucuses, which many people in those states agree to, and the outcome of the caucuses would determine who got the delegate votes from Michigan and Florida, and everyone would be happy.

"This is not changing the rules in the middle of the game, this is finding an alternative way to have those states' voters, democratic voters, have a choice.

"It borders on the edge of ridiculous to have these minute states with overwhelmingly white populations, so different from the rest of the country, and I'm talking about Iowa and New Hampshire, to have them exercise this enormous influence in this process has been wrong for years and years, and it is only because they insisted on this that the present situation involving michigan and florida has arisen.

"I'm inserting the naacp in a fight to have votes counted, and that's a fight we've been fighting for longer than most people have been alive, and one we'll continue to fight.

"I'm the chairman of the board, I'm empowered to speak for the NAACP between meetings of the board of directors. We'll have a board meeting in new york this weekend, and we'll see whether or not there's any fallout from this. I doubt there is. I think most people support it.

"There are 64 of them, and it's a little hard to discuss every public statement I make before I make it.

"The day before yesterday I was accused of authoring an op-ed whose title was '10 reasons not to vote for hillary clinton', and as that got wide distribution on the internet, I became an obama stooge. Now a day later I've become a clinton stooge, and of course I'm neither. I have not endorsed either candidate or any other, I don't intend to. The naacp never does, we never have. But we believe that in a democratic system every vote ought to be counted, and hope that the democratic party finds a way to let democrats in michigan and florida express their will and have their state represented at the democratic convention, that's all we've done.

"I think because partisans have become involved in it, and people who are trying to make a name for themselves by inserting themselves in every controversy that comes along."

NAACP chair Julian Bonds wants Mich., Florida delegates seated

While Sen. Barack Obama was racking up three huge wins last night in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, word broke that NAACP Chairman Julian Bond had sent a letter to the head of the Democratic National Committee asking that the delegates from Michigan and Florida be seated.

Talk about stepping into a messy situation!

Background: The DNC stripped the folks in Florida and Michigan of their delegates because state officials there moved their primaries up before Feb. 5. The DNC agreed to only allow four states - Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada - to vote before that date.

All of the Democratic candidates signed pledges not to campaign in those states, and the top tier candidates - except Sen. Hillary Clinton - removed their names from the ballot in Michigan.

When asked on the campaign trail, each said that the votes in Michigan and Florida were not going to count. When voting commenced, Clinton "won" Michigan and Florida, and proceeded to say that she would fight to have the delegates seated.

She has argued that since she won the states they should be awarded to her, while the Obama campaign has argued that in non-contested races, this is unfair.

Because the nomination fight between the two is so tight, every delegate will count.

My sources tell me that Bond, Mary Frances Berry, former head of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, as well as Wade Henderson, CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, all worked on the letter on Friday (Berry and Henderson both sit on the search committee seeking a new president and CEO of the group to replace Bruce Gordon).

Bond argues that he doesn't want to see minority voters disenfranchised, but what's interesting is that CNN exit polls show that nearly 70 percent of blacks didn't vote for Clinton Michigan, so who is Bond referring to?

I emailed Bond last night, but got no response. I also emailed Berry, as well as called and emailed Henderson, but have not gotten a response.

When I got the tip regarding the letter, I called the Rev. Al Sharpton to hear if he had heard about the letter, and he was stunned when apprised of it.

He said that he was sending his own letter to Dean today, stating that if the DNC tries to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates, he would lead a protest in front of the group's national headquarters.

My NAACP sources also say that Bond was out of bounds for sending the letter - one called it "disgusting" - because he didn't apprise the board of it, nor the group's executive committee.

"At not time did this come before the board, and I don’t believe the board would have sanctioned and allowed this to happen," one board member told me. "This is a unilateral move and a power play."

Another board member says they have received calls from across the national from state officers threatening to resign, and regular members saying they will tear up their cards and quit the group.

Does this make Bond concerned? Not according to an interview with Carol Costello of CNN, which will be done on The Situation Room today.

He said he's heard no discontent from the board, which is meeting this weekend.

Question of the Day: Should NAACP Chairman Julian Bond have waded into Democratic Party politics by wanting to have the Michigan and Florida delegates seated?

Copy of letter NAACP Chairman Julian Bond sent to DNC Chair Howard Dean

To view letter, just double click the image.

Bush speaks about lynching in White House Black History Month celebration

Every year the president has a Black History Month celebration at the White House. It was no different this year. But what was a change was the message offered by the president.

Below is the speech given by President George W. Bush. Look especially for his remarks about nooses and American history.

Very good speech, Mr. President.

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AT CELEBRATION OF AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY MONTH

East Room

3:00 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all for coming. Good afternoon, and welcome to the White House. Laura and I are honored that you all came, as we celebrate African American History Month. This is a month in which we recognize the many African Americans who've made great contributions to our country. We honor the talent and their courage. We renew our commitment to securing liberty and justice for every American. That's why we're here.

I appreciate many of the notables who have joined us: Madam Secretary, appreciate you coming. (Applause.) Mr. Secretary Alphonso Jackson and Marcia. Thanks for coming, Mr. Secretary. Proud you're here. (Applause.)

If I skip some of the notables, it's because I'm going to say something about them a little later on. (Laughter.) So, Congressman, I'll be with you in a minute. (Laughter.)

I appreciate Dr. Leonard Haynes, who's the Executive Director of the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities. I am proud -- Doc, thanks for coming. I'm proud to welcome all the presidents from the Historically Black Colleges and Universities here today; really appreciate your service to the country.

I want to thank Ron Langston, National Director of the Minority Business Development Agency. Roslyn Brock, Vice Chairman of the NAACP -- Roslyn, thank you for coming. Somewhere -- there you are. I thank John Fleming, President, Association of the Study of African American Life and History. Reverend Al Sharpton, and his wife Dominique -- Reverend, it's good to see you.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Daughter.

THE PRESIDENT: Daughter. (Laughter.) Daughter. (Laughter.) I don't get them right all the time. (Laughter.) But thank you for coming. And, Dominique, you're sure a lot prettier than your father. (Laughter.)

Thurgood Marshall, Jr., we're proud you're here. Thanks for coming. Good to see you, sir. State Representative Calvin Smyre, of the state of Georgia, who is the President of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators. Sure proud you're here.

Thank you all for coming. There's a lot of other notables here. Just consider yourself welcomed. (Laughter.)

The theme of this year's African American History Month is a celebration of America's cultural diversity. It is a tribute to a scholar who deepened our appreciation for diversity: Carter G. Woodson. When Dr. Woodson began his career in the early 20th century, most Americans knew little about African American heritage. Dr. Woodson set out to correct that. His scholarship helped pioneer the field of African American studies. And by the time he passed away in 1950, this son of freed slaves had become known as the Father of Black History.

It is important for all our citizens to know the history of the African American struggle for equality. We must remember that the slave trade brought many Africans to America in chains, not by choice. We must remember how slaves claimed their God-given right to freedom. And we must remember how freed slaves and their descendants helped rededicate America to the ideals of its founding.

Our nation has come a long way toward building a more perfect union. Yet as past injustices have become distant memories, there's a risk that our society may lose sight of the real suffering that took place. One symbol of that suffering is the noose. Recently, there have been a number of media reports about nooses being displayed. These disturbing reports have resulted in heightened racial tensions in many communities. They have revealed that some Americans do not understand why the sight of a noose causes such a visceral reaction among so many people.

For decades, the noose played a central part in a campaign of violence and fear against African Americans. Fathers were dragged from their homes in the dark of the night before the eyes of their terrified children. Summary executions were held by torchlight in front of hateful crowds. In many cases, law enforcement officers responsible for protecting the victims were complicit in their deeds [sic] and their deaths. For generations of African Americans, the noose was more than a tool of murder; it was a tool of intimidation that conveyed a sense of powerlessness to millions.

The era of rampant lynching is a shameful chapter in American history. The noose is not a symbol of prairie justice, but of gross injustice. Displaying one is not a harmless prank. And lynching is not a word to be mentioned in jest. As a civil society, we must understand that noose displays and lynching jokes are deeply offensive. They are wrong. And they have no place in America today. (Applause.)

This afternoon we honor four Americans who understand what this symbol represents, and who are leading the way toward ending racial injustice across our land.

Congressman John Lewis earned his place in history long before winning a seat in the United States Capitol. As a young man, he became one of the leaders of the civil rights movement. He organized freedom rides and sit-ins and voter registration drives. One Sunday in 1965, he set out to lead a march from Selma to Montgomery. The marchers never made it past the rows of state troopers outside Selma. But their message made it all the way to Washington, D.C. Five months later, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act. And more than 40 years later, John Lewis continues to inspire us -- and we're blessed to have him here today. (Applause.)

William Coleman has lived a life of many firsts. After graduating first in his class from Harvard Law School, he went on to become both the first Black American to clerk on the Supreme Court, and the first to hold a Cabinet post in a Republican administration, as Secretary of Transportation under President Gerald Ford. William Coleman has also helped open doors of opportunity for others. He worked alongside Thurgood Marshall, father of this good man, on the legal team that triumphed in Brown versus Board of Education. This ruling exposed the fallacy of "separate but equal" -- and it helped return America to the great truth that "all men are created equal." For this, we owe William Coleman our lasting thanks. We're honored to have you today, sir. (Applause.)

Three years after Brown versus Board of Education, nine students in Little Rock stepped forward to test the Supreme Court's ruling. On September 25, 1957, federal troops escorted them into the city's all-white Central High School. Once inside, the Little Rock Nine were spit on, harassed, and called names. One of the students was a senior named Ernest Green. As graduation day approached, some suggested it might be safer for Ernest to receive his diploma in the mail. Many people would have taken this advice -- not Ernest Green. In May of 1958, Martin Luther King, Jr. was on hand to watch Ernest become the first African American to graduate from Little Rock's Central High School. We're honored to welcome Ernest Green to the White House during the 50th anniversary -- (applause.)

And finally, as a young boy, Otis Williams remembers his mother packing food for their move from Texas -- oh, what a tragic mistake -- (laughter) -- to Detroit. She did so because restaurants along the route refused to serve African Americans. In Detroit, Otis Williams grew up to become the leader of one of the most successful vocal groups in the history of our country: the Temptations. This group has recorded 37 Top 40 singles -- including four Number One hits on the pop charts. Their success paved the way for other African American artists. Their melodies continue bringing Americans of all races together to this day.

Otis can remember performing in a venue in South Carolina, where blacks and whites in the crowd were separated by a barrier. The next year when the Temptations returned, the racial divide was gone. As Otis once put it, "The highest achievement for me has been ...to have our music penetrate all kinds of barriers -- for it to be colorless." The music of the Temptations has given countless Americans sunshine on a cloudy day -- (laughter) -- and we cannot help ourselves from loving them. (Laughter.)

Throughout African American History Month, we remember how individuals, African American leaders of all kinds helped bring our nation together. We recognize our nation still has a long way to go. But in the example of the leaders like those we honor today, we see strength greater than any division. And we see hope for a day when freedom rings from every mountainside, and every corner of the country.

And now it is my great pleasure to introduce the Temptations. (Applause.)

Hillary: Obama won Louisiana because of black folks; disses small states he also won

When John Edwards got blown out of Nevada by Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, he didn't offer a bunch of excuses.

All he said was, "I got my butt kicked in Nevada."

Since Clinton loves to praise Edwards, why don't she take a page out of his book and admit that over the weekend, Obama kicked her butt?

Clinton and her campaign staff have feverishly tried to dismiss Obama's wins in Washington State, Nebraska, Maine, and the Virgin Islands as small states that will otherwise go Republican in the fall. As it relates to Louisiana, she suggested that the black vote made his win a possibility.

The problem with this is that is flawed in several areas. First, Clinton campaigned hard in Washington, where she had both female U.S. senators backing her. In Maine, she was supposed to win. And in Louisiana, CNN exit polls show that 50 percent of all voters were white, and 44 percent were black. Large percentage? Yes. But more white votes.

As a result, Clinton has made her task hard. She is likely to lose D.C., Maryland and Virginia, meaning she must win Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

My suggestion for her new campaign manager, Maggie Williams: tell the candidate to spend more time campaigning in small states, rather than ignoring them by focusing on the larger ones. Doe she want to be the Democratic nominee of the Big States or all of America?

Roland S. Martin talks with Rep. Maxine Waters

Again, we had audio issues, and this is the interview I conducted with Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), a supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton, regarding Super Tuesday.

Listen for the end of the interview when I asked Rep. Waters about how she would vote as a superdelegate if her congressional district voted to back Obama.

powered by ODEO

Roland S. Martin talks with Spike Lee

We had some audio issues and were unable to load this interview last week. But film director Spike Lee, a supporter of Sen. Barack Obama, didn't hold back in his criticism of Sen. Hillary Clinton her husband, former President Bill Clinton, on the issue of race.

powered by ODEO

Why Obama should skip Tavis Smiley's State of the Black Union

Sen. Barack Obama took a lot of heat last year from participants in Tavis Smiley's State of the Black Union annual confab, which was held in Virginia. To be fair, he was a little busy that day...announcing HE WAS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!

Some of the folks there were besides themselves, and frankly, were childish about it, even saying that he should have put off his presidential announcement to be there.

Now, almost a year later, he is faced with a similar dilemma.

Tavis has announced that he will hold his State of the Black Union annual talkfest on Feb. 23 in New Orleans, La. This is a huge event attended by thousands each year; broadcast on C-SPAN; and attracts some of the nation's top black activists, politicians and intellectuals.

During his commentary Thursday on the Tom Joyner Morning Show, the most listened to black radio show, Tavis said he's invited the three top candidates, Republican frontrunner, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, and Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. He said only one has accepted, and he will wait until tomorrow for the other two to decide.

He didn't say which one decided to attend, but on Friday, Clinton announced that she was attending.

In his commentary, Smiley said he was going to snap on those who don't attend on Tuesday's show, demanding that they own up to black issues and zero in on social justice issues as outlined in the book he edited, "The Covenant with Black America."

Here is my analysis of the situation, and hopefully it will put this presidential campaign and the delicate task of navigating the waters of black politics in perspective.

1. Clinton MUST attend. She led Obama in all of 2007 among black voters by huge margins. But that trend has shifted -dramatically. At best, she's polling at 25% among African Americans. Her acceptance is critical because she needs to capture 30% to 40% of the black to really stop Obama.

The perceived racial slights toward Obama by Clinton campaign surrogates, as well as her husband, former President Bill Clinton, has done significant damage in the black community. His attempts to explain the comments haven't mollified African Americans. Her appearance at the event can help her restore her standing among a vital Democratic constituency, which she will need to turn out en masse if she wins the nomination.

Also, her campaign doesn't have the cash Obama has. She needs any free media. And if Obama shows up, that means all the national media will be there, and the stage is set for her. Tavis said on the air that he would push for the candidates to debate the issues. She's called for more; Obama has only accepted two.

Smart politics on her part, and if I were advising her, no doubt I would tell her to attend.

2. Obama must look forward, not in the past. The Louisiana primary, which he won handily, was on Saturday. Why go back to Louisiana for an event on Feb. 23? That is not to dismiss the needs of people along the Gulf Coast. But the only way he can truly help them is if he wins the nomination and the White House.

Obama needs to be solely focused on Texas and Ohio. Those two mega-states offer a huge bounty of delegates, and he needs to win a large state to move ahead of Clinton. She polls strongly in both states, and they are a huge part of her winning strategy; so much of her time will be spent there in the coming weeks.

All his time must be on the ground. In Texas, he must blanket South Texas because of the Hispanic influence. He didn't do well among Hispanics in California, and he must change that.

There is some hope (no pun intended). When former Dallas Mayor Ron Kirk ran in 2002 for the U.S. Senate, he took 74 percent of South Texas. Yes, an Hispanic was running for governor, but that bodes well for Obama. In Ohio, he must do well among blue collar Democrats. Clinton has owned these low- to middle-income voters, and Obama must score well among them.

If Tavis wanted to have an impact, he should have held his event before Louisiana or before the Mississippi primary. As the saying goes, bad planning on your part doesn't constitute a sense of urgency on mine.

3. He can't be defined again as the black candidate. Some will say he must avoid black folks to be more palatable to whites and Hispanics. I disagree. But you can't deny the reality that he's running for president of the United States and not president of Black America. The week of the South Carolina was all about race, and he knows that is not a winning discussion because of this nation's history. His campaign successfully beat back that issue since South Carolina, winning nearly all-white states like Utah, Idaho, Montana, Minnesota, Delaware, Connecticut, and Nebraska.

Obama is looking to have mass appeal, and showing up in New Orleans at a State of the Black Union event doesn't help him at all in a close race.

4. Send Michelle Obama. What is the purpose of surrogates if you can't make it somewhere? His wife is perfectly suited for this event, and that frees him up to go elsewhere. Plus, he's his top surrogate, and having a female counter your female opponent isn't a bad matchup.

Ask any campaign manager and they will tell you that when it comes to politics, especially in a close race, every minute matters. Candidates are on the phone lines campaigning, trying to raise money, and secure endorsements.

Spending the day with Tavis and his panelists is vital for Clinton. For Obama, time spent courting Latinos in Texas is more important.

African Americans are asking a lot of Obama, the best chance blacks have ever had of one of their own capturing the White House. I often hear folks say they want to know if he is going to back "their" issues. It is no different than how white women are feeling about Clinton. These are indeed historic firsts.

By the way, when people say that black issues are being ignored in the campaign, they are wrong.

The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, the nation's most prestigious think tank devoted to African American issues, released a survey showing that the top issues to blacks are the war in Iraq; healthcare; jobs and the economy; and education.

Sounds to me like the candidates have spent a lot of time on those issues, although they could always do more.

As an aside, when I asked my radio listeners on WVON in Chicago if Obama should skip the event, we got 29 calls in two hours, and only two said he should go. And this is a crowd that is normally in agreement with Smiley.

Question of the Day: Do you think Sen. Barack Obama should attend Tavis Smiley's State of the Black Union event in New Orleans on Feb. 23?

Roland S. Martin talks with actor Chris Tucker about Super Tuesday

Roland S. Martin talks with actor Chris Tucker, a supporter of Sen. Barack Obama.

powered by ODEO

Roland S. Martin talks with Dr. Iyanla Vanzant about Super Tuesday

Roland S. Martin talks with Dr. Iyanla Vanzant, a supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton.

powered by ODEO

Roland S. Martin talks with actress Kerry Washington about Super Tuesday

Roland S. Martin talks with actress Kerry Washington, a supporter of Sen. Barack Obama.

powered by ODEO

Roland S. Martin talks with Illinois Senate President Emil Jones about Super Tuesday

Roland S. Martin talks with Illinois Senate President Emil Jones, a longtime supporter of Sen. Barack Obama.

powered by ODEO

Roland S. Martin talks with Rev. Marcia Dyson about Super Tuesday

Roland S. Martin talks with the Rev. Marcia Dyson, a surrogate of Sen. Hillary Clinton.

powered by ODEO

Roland S. Martin talks with Boston journalist Callie Crossley about Super Tuesday

Roland S. Martin talks with Callie Crossley, host of “Beat the Press,” a media criticsm show on WGBH-TV in Boston, Mass., regarding the Super Tuesday election.

powered by ODEO

Britney deserves a break...from us

Ever since Britney Spears began her downward spiral, I have been pretty much silent on her drama.

Didn’t discuss it on my radio show; CNN; TV One Cable Network, where I’m a commentator; my blog on Essence.com; or in my syndicated column.

Why? Because this is a sick woman. She is a young woman who is having a nervous breakdown before our very eyes, and the papparazzi, entertainment shows, blogs and magazines don’t give a damn. And to be honest, the public doesn’t give a damn.

Britney has a melt down, and we flock to read, watch and comment. This is a blood sport. Yep, I said it. Watching Britney’s travails is like the people who enjoy cockfights and dogfights. Let’s see someone fight with their inner demons and we get a perverse pleasure out of it.

You might say I’m contributing to the Britney focus, but somebody has to say what needs to be said. This fixation on this young women is sickening.

Don’t give me that crap about her being rich and deserving of all of this. No one should have to be hounded, followed like OJ in a white Bronco, and torn apart just to satisfy our insatiable desire to know.

Britney Spears has a mental disease. She is enduring a living hell, and too many others are willing to harm her even further, not to help.

Instead of feeding into the freezy, pray for this woman. Pray that she will find some solace and peace in the hell she’s living in. And pray for the countless other young men and women who are battling this disease. Some are white, black and Hispanic, and mental illness is affecting millions.

A great read on this topic is authored by Terrie Williams, who wrote “Black Pain: It Just Looks Like We're Not Hurting,” She’s a friend and successful publicist, and reveals her own battle with