John McCain is going to appear in Memphis today, on the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's assassination. That's worthy of a brass balls award as the Arizona senator has a long history of opposing civil rights legislation, including the federal MLK holiday, something he voted against as a Congressman in 1983. He now says he "evolved" and regrets that vote.
In 1983, when I was brand-new in the Congress, I voted against the recognition of Dr. Martin Luther King. That was a mistake, OK? And later I had the chance to … help fight for … the recognition of Dr. Martin Luther King as a holiday in my state."The good folks at Color of Change have a fact sheet up on McCain's civil rights record. It's questionable whether his evolution is occurring at even a glacial pace. Decide for yourself as you read the items below the fold.
The fact of the matter is that McCain brought this on himself, with his paper trail of cozying up to racists and his voting record. And to think it continues to this day as he courts religious (Hagee, Parsley) and homophobic bigots (the entire professional “Christian” set) for personal political gain.Arizona Governor Rescinded Martin Luther King Jr. Day. In 1987, One of newly elected Governor Evan Mecham’s first acts in office was to rescind Arizona’s recognition of the Martin Luther King Holiday. “Mecham strikes many voters as a simpleminded ideologue who is giving a bad name to the nation’s second-fastest-growing state. After rescinding the Jan. 19 holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr., Mecham defended the use of the term “pickaninnies” for blacks.” [Time 11/9/87]
McCain Said He Thought Governor Was Correct in His Decision According to the Huffington Post, “In 1983, McCain voted against passing a bill to designate the third Monday of every January as a federal holiday in honor of King. Four years later, then-Arizona Governor Evan Mecham rescinded Martin Luther King Day as a state holiday, saying it had been established through an illegal executive order by his Democratic predecessor. McCain said he thought Mecham was correct in his decision.” [Sam Stein, Huffington Post, 4/1/08]
McCain Consistently Voted Against The Civil Rights Act Of 1990. In 1990, McCain voted against a bill designed to address employer discrimination at least 4 times. According to the Washington Post, the “Civil Rights Act of 1990 is designed to overturn several recent Supreme Court rulings that made it much more difficult for individual employees to prove discrimination. The legislation, being fought by business, also would impose new penalties on employers convicted of job discrimination.” [S 2104, Vote #304, 10/24/90; Vote #276, Vote #275, 10/16/90; Vote #161, 7/18/90; Washington Post, 7/9/90]
McCain Defended Controversial Spokesman Richard Quinn, McCain’s who called the MLK Holiday “Vitriolic and Profane.” Richard Quinn, was a South Carolina “strategist” for McCain in the 2000 campaign. In a Partisan View column, Richard Quinn wrote, “King Day should have been rejected because its purpose is vitriolic and profane. By celebrating King as the incarnation of all they admire, they [black leaders] have chosen to glorify the histrionic rather than the heroic and by inference they spurned the brightest and the best among their own race. Ignoring the real heroes in our nation’s life, the blacks have chosen a man who represents not their emancipation, not their sacrifices and bravery in service to their country; rather, they have chosen a man whose role in history was to lead his people into a perpetual dependence on the welfare state, a terrible bondage of body and soul.” Quinn has also advocated electing David Duke, and sold T-Shirts through his magazine celebrating Abraham Lincoln’s assassination. [Partisan View, Southern Partisan, Fall, 1983; Partisan View, Southern Partisan, Winter, 1989, PFAW Release, 2/17/00] [Spartanburg Herald-Journal, 12/23/05; Vanity Fair, 11/04]
McCain Defended Quinn as ‘Respected’ and a ‘Fine Man.” Despite Mr. Quinn’s writings and history of racial insensitivity, McCain defended him as a ‘respected’ and ‘fine man’ and refused to fire him. [Associated Press, 2/18/00; New York Times, 2/8/00]
15 Responses to “Honoring Dr. King - McCain’s sorry record”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Let’s just look at the “evolution” of McCain, shall we?
He was born in 1936. That makes him almost 32 when MLK was killed, only a few years younger than Dr King himself. In 1983, he was 47. In 1990, he was 54. And in 2000, he was 64.
Gee, sure looks like a firmly established lifelong adult pattern of racism to me, Pam!
I was 3 when Dr King was killed, raised in a racist household, and questioning my parents’ racisim at age 15. Am now 42 and have never swayed from trying my damnedest to understand the complexities involved, to find out and fight the pervasive unknown elements established within myself.
That McCain is opportunistically speaking today in Memphis is an abomination and a travesty.
Jeez, I’d forgotten that Mecham fuck.
Somebody should ask McCain to enthuse about his good buddy Evan Mecham a bit.
Frankly, I’ve been wondering when McCain and Hillary would give their national address on race in America. Obama did.
He now says he “evolved” and regrets that vote.
trick statement, repugs don’t believe in evolution
I blogged about this a while back.
…In fact, McCain has a 3% rating from NARAL and a 0% rating from the nation’s premier women’s rights group — Planned Parenthood (NARAL’s scorecard includes bills on stem cell research, while Planned Parenthood’s scorecard excludes stem cell votes. McCain voted for stem cell research bills four times, the only four times he has voted with NARAL’s position on the group’s 117 votes since he became Senator in 1987). McCain also has been absent from the Senate more than any other Senator — he missed exactly 50% of the votes the Senate has casted since the Democrats took over the chamber. More troubling is the fact that John McCain wants a permanent war in Iraq. The Democratic candidates will bring our troops home from this illegal war within 183 days of becoming president. And Sen. Obama said it correctly over the past week: “There was no al-Qaida in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain voted to invade Iraq.”
McCain’s very partisan record stands in deep contrast to the bipartisan records of Sens. Obama and Clinton. Obama and Clinton has at 100% records from every major women’s group and they also have high ratings from the ACLU and NAACP — (Obama at 80% from the ACLU and 100% from NAACP and Clinton at 67% from the ACLU and 96% from the NAACP) America’s number one and number two civil rights groups.
McCain’s rating amongst these civil rights groups are 0% and 7%, respectively.
…
My dad and McCain are virtually the same age.
Knowing how far my dad has come, AND knowing how far he still needs to go to approach being reasonable on issues like race, sexism, bigotry against LGBT’s, etc., just gives me huge pause when contemplating the possibility of McCain/BushIII.
It would no doubt result in at least 4-more years of delay in our social evolution, and there’s a good chance it would result in retrenchment.
I think this is the strongest reason I support Obama - I’m sick to death of the endless parade of barely distinguishable old white guys who’ve counted on POTUS as their birthright.
Get out of the way and bring in some fresh perspectives. The country has never been one color. Why should POTUS always be white and male?…
trick statement, repugs don’t believe in evolution
Except as it pertains to themselves.
Dubya “evolved” from a drunken screwup to…whatever he is today. McCain “evolved” from a corrupt suckler on Charles Keating’s teat to a fearless reformer. Now he’s “evolving” from a racist panderer to an enlightened (but not too enlightened) believer in racial equality. I swear, these people have parsed evolution more finely than Darwin could have done had he lived to be 500.
McBush hasn’t evolved one bit. It would be amazing if racist throwbacks were so mad they stayed home. It would be a great day for America. But somehow, both sides seem to think they need the racist ReaganDixieDemocrats. So we get more candidates taking principled stands *against* the most hard-fought, but still barely-liberal, common-sense gestures toward racial equality. So, pander to the racists, but by golly don’t pander to the anti-racists. That would be starting trouble.
Obviously I’m sheltered, because it seems totally bizarre and weird and nigh-incomprehensible to fight *against* a Martin Luther King Day. Just, what?? And that bit about how MLK wasn’t “really” a good black leader is just vile.
:(
“Obviously I’m sheltered, because it seems totally bizarre and weird and nigh-incomprehensible to fight *against* a Martin Luther King Day.”
If it was just a fight over whether to honor one man or not, it wouldn’t make any sense to be vehemently opposed.
The problem is that MLK is more than a man. He’s a symbolic representative of Blacks in America.
I know I had relatives who didn’t understand AT ALL what Dr. King and the others were doing at the time. Too much white privilege, conservative political views, lower-class background, etc. They probably never thought for a second how their position in life differed from that of Black Americans, why it was different, and what they could do to help.
There was also a very vigorous effort, at the time, by the FBI and others to discredit MLK by any and all means - mostly “dirty” - because they saw him as a threat.
So, much later, it was no surprise when some of my relatives were against an MLK holiday. They were ignorant racists.
And so were most of the others who were against honoring MLK. They may not have been actual white-sheet-wearing load and violent racists, but they were still racists.
Many of these same people treat the confederate flag as some sort of important symbol (of freedom/hate/civil-rights…? I don’t know and don’t understand).
So when some kind of opportunity comes up for them to express their true feelings, many of them let loose about MLK and his holiday. He’s become some kind of touchstone for exposing closet racists…
A sober screw-up?
One man come in the name of love
One man come and go
One man come, he to justify
One man to overthrow
In the name of love
What more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love
One man caught on a barbed wire fence
One man he resist
One man washed on an empty beach.
One man betrayed with a kiss
In the name of love
What more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love
(nobody like you…)
Early morning, april 4
Shot rings out in the memphis sky
Free at last, they took your life
They could not take your pride
In the name of love
What more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love…
Ben—Les mots justes. Thank you.
“He now says he “evolved” and regrets that vote.
trick statement, repugs don’t believe in evolution
Except as it pertains to themselves.
Dubya “evolved” from a drunken screwup to…whatever he is today. McCain “evolved” from a corrupt suckler on Charles Keating’s teat to a fearless reformer. Now he’s “evolving” from a racist panderer to an enlightened (but not too enlightened) believer in racial equality. I swear, these people have parsed evolution more finely than Darwin could have done had he lived to be 500.”
Not to mention that we must all be forced to take them at face value on their evolution the very first time they mention it, whereas when Robert Byrd votes against civil rights legislation but has since regretted it many, many times over, we must forever remind him about it and shame him for it, even as he gets 100% ratings from the NAACP.
“McCain’s very partisan record stands in deep contrast to the bipartisan records of Sens. Obama and Clinton.”
Please don’t repeat the partisanship bad, bipartisanship good meme. It’s really harmful to sane politics. Seriously, think about what you just wrote. Do you think Obama and Clinton are getting high scores from the ACLU, NAACP, and women’s groups for their willingness to compromise with Republicans?