True. I don't agree with Sharpton on everything, but there's a lot of slander in what you hear, judging from an article I read contrasting published claims with his actual statements. For instance, people have presented quotes by black people in the street as Sharpton's.
I get the feeling he was wrong to hang onto the Tawana Brawley (sp?) story, and his track record on anti-Semitism is murky. But not what it's reported as being.
And like Jesse Jackson, he is simply far to the left of anyone else. The more he can shift the party, the better, in my book.

Hear hear!

Folks have missed the most disgusting part of Novak's column:

"This is a problem waiting to happen for the Democratic Party thanks to reliance on black voters, particularly in the South. Democrats dodged the bullet when the Rev. Jesse Jackson ran for President (and succeeded in ruining young Al Gore’s 1988 bid aimed at sweeping Southern primaries). This reliance is much stronger 15 years later, and a black candidate promises to distort an already confused contest for the nomination."

Relying on black, Latino, Asian, gay, Jewish, PHD, and feminist votes = bad;

relying exclusively on white straight christians without PHDs = good.

I agree. I had an argument with a moderate awhile back about whether Sharpton is just as bad as Trent Lott. To me he just plain isn't. The Brawley stink was bad, but nothing like the stuff the neo-Confederates do.

To me the DLC/New Republic traitors on the right have been more effectively harmful to the Dems than Nader and the Greens have been. So far, Nader is a one-time problem, which you can't say about Peretz for example.

More at my URL

Every time Al has run for office I'be been entertained. In a lot of ways, after his stabbing, I think he's grown as a person. And he can be great when he focuses on issues. I don't have chapter and verse on Crown Heights, but as for standing up for the kids in the Central Park case and leading the protests in Bensonhurst I think he was right on.

But what he did in the Brawley case and its aftermath was wrong. It wasn't just hanging on to her story, it was amplifying it, honing it, and accusing someone of committing a heinous crime without any evidence. He should apologize. He should set up a fund to pay his settlement (I'd contribute). I, at least, would be able to turn the page. There's a big difference between this instance of private bad behavior and, say, Bill Clinton's. Public character does matter.

Every time Al has run for office I'be been entertained. In a lot of ways, after his stabbing, I think he's grown as a person. And he can be great when he focuses on issues. I don't have chapter and verse on Crown Heights, but as for standing up for the kids in the Central Park case and leading the protests in Bensonhurst I think he was right on.

But what he did in the Brawley case and its aftermath was wrong. It wasn't just hanging on to her story, it was amplifying it, honing it, and accusing someone of committing a heinous crime without any evidence. He should apologize. He should set up a fund to pay his settlement (I'd contribute). I, at least, would be able to turn the page. There's a big difference between this instance of private bad behavior and, say, Bill Clinton's. Public character does matter.

If you think that racism personified gives you a better shot at winning than the DLC's distastefully impure moderation, be my guest.

I just hope you have your party theorists ready to explain it away when '04 turns out worse than '02.

You won't see many victories till you marginalize your radicals, as the Post-Goldwater conservatives were forced to do.

I don't think you'll actually take my evil capitalist imperialist nazi advice, but I couldn't in good conscience not warn you.

Have a GREAT day :)