My Evening With Harriet Christian

It was when the DNC's Rules & Bylaws Committee made its ruling on Michigan that Harriet Christian came into my life.

From a few rows behind me, her piercing, wizened, New York voice rang out through the awkward silences in the auditorium of the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.

I wish now I could remember each and everything she said. All I remember is that I was glad she was saying it. The DNC had just committed a crime, and I was happy that there was someone unashamed to reveal her fury to all those present.

As we all exited the ballroom -- many of us in disgust -- I saw the cameras swarm in on our Harriet. I decided to stay and watch her in her glory.

In fact, I have a confession to make. It was I who encouraged Harriet to stay and to face the cameras. Each time she wanted to storm from the lobby in a fiery exeunt, it was I who stopped her, consoled her, turned her around, and told her "Your anger needs to be heard, friend. Don't stop."

Did I think that she could have been more coherent at first? Yes, I did. Did I feel that she was flirting with the edge of reason? Yes, I did. Would I have had her change a thing? No, I wouldn't.

I would like to add that I don't condone any correlation between the words "black" and "inadequate." It is my belief that she was not *equating* "black" with "inadequate." I believe she was saying that *Obama* is inadequate, and that he is where he is because of affirmative action tactics -- much as Geraldine Ferraro has said, and not unlike Joe Biden's misspeak last year. Again, though, not words I personally would have ever chosen.

Many have criticized Harriet for what is being categorized as her "circus antics." What they call "antics," I call the red blood of Democracy. She was angry. She was angry as I was angry. We were angry as thousands of people were angry. That anger needed a voice that wasn't couched behind cold, intellectually dishonest reason.

The DNC had committed an act of war, and Harriet was firing back with bullets of passion. Was she the best marksman? Perhaps not. But did she reveal to America the depth of frustration that many, many people are feeling right now? That she did.

We all know that -- had she been as calm and collected as so many of you feel she should have been -- that she wouldn't have the nearly 800,000 YouTube hits she now does. Her voice has been heard.

Is that to say that I believe that Harriet was seeking attention? Not at all. As I've said, it was I who kept the fires of encouragement lit beneath her. She has since confessed to me many a time how she now fears that her emotions might be used to hurt Hillary Clinton's campaign. That is the last thing she wants. She simply wanted to cry out against injustice... as so many of us often want to do, but so few of us actually do.

And, for the record: No, she hadn't been drinking. I had the fortune of talking with Harriet well into the night that night. (It was 2am when we finally said "Good night" to one another). While I was knocking back my white Russians and my margaritas, she touched nothing but her Diet Coke. She hasn't touched alcohol since 1985. The only thing she was drunk on that afternoon was indignation.

I hope you will all take the time to get to know Harriet as I have. Harriet is salty. Harriet is a firecracker. Harriet is many things. But Harriet is not a lunatic. She is a life long New Yorker who has worked for civil rights for over forty years. She's a woman full of life and passion. She's a woman who gave her emotions free reign for a few well-televised minutes.

Let those of you who have not exploded in anger cast the first stone... whether or not you were on TV when you did so.

Comments

[nomobull]

and you are proud of this.why?

[LittleBearNYC]

This is SATIRE, right????

[nomobull]

NO READ IT AGAIN

[CindyM2008]

Unfortunately it's not.

[more5600]

she's also voting for john mccain, some democrat...

[lisac63]

Why couldn't she have just said an inadequate man if thats how she feels instead of an inadequate "black" man. He is, after all, a man....just the same as any other..
You can't convince me that she isn't racist.

[Cunningham]

Nor me.

[TinaGirlla]

Me neither.

[ATL78]

As far as I know, she isn't a racist ;)

[SaddieMcCall]

The hypocritical Ickes who voted to take away 100% of the votes before Hillary needed them to count, then he acts indignant to fuel the flame. What kind of rules committee would permit a paid campaign manager to sit on the committee to vote for sanctions that would directly affect his boss? That seems a bit of a conflict of interest.

[JayHorus]

There was two actually...Harold and Tina, the lady sitting right next to Ickes. They was both on Hillary's payroll, although I am not sure how accurate that is because of how much debt she owes lol.

[readerK]

Fair: What DNC rules exactly did Hillary break? Obama advertised in FL for a week before the FL primary. He claimed that the ad was a part of a national ad buy, and could not pull it in FL. Following his logic, he must have advertised also in MI. In either case, he broke the rule prohibiting candidates from any campaign activity in any state that had broken the DNC rules. Candidates were also forbidden from hiring campaign workers or appearing in person in sanctioned states.

Michigan news outlets reported copiously that "supporters" of Obama, Edwards and Richardson campaigned for the "uncommitted" slot on the MI ballot. Did the DNC investigate whether those supporters were actually hired campaign workers, thus making Obama a rule breaker on hiring campaign workers as well?

Hillary broke no rules! Leaving her name on the ballot in MI was not contrary to the rules, just as Obama taking his name off the same ballot was admirable, but was not a response to any specific DNC requirement.

Regarding the DNC robbing Hillary of those four voting delegates: Are not fairness and justice the essences of the Democratic Party? Whether one is for Obama, Hillary or McCain, how could any democrat, Democrat or Republican be unconcerned about votes being stolen from ANY candidate? For the DNC and those Democrats who are not bothered that Hillary was robbed, were you equally not bothered when Al Gore was robbed in 2000? Fair, BE FAIR. readerK.

[nomobull]

how can you rob someone of something that wasn't theirs to begin with.

[nomobull]

proof

[csepwede]

you guys are trying to win delegates on a technicality and it goes against my basic sense of fair play.

[mawrm]

You state "Candidates were also forbidden from hiring campaign workers or appearing in person in sanctioned states."

And claim "Hillary broke no rules! "

Ummm, might want to check into those "fundraisers" that Hillary attended in Florida prior to the primary there.

Hillary was not given the four delegates because giving her the four delegates would be based on a primary that the DNC Rules and Bylaws committee agreed was INVALID. So in order to NOT use an INVALID primary to allocate the delegates and give it any hint of legitimacy ('cause if they got the four delegates, the Clinton camp would then claim the MI race was legitimate and add it to their Enron math popular vote totals), the decision was made to respect that Hillary had won the flawed primary , but not allocate delegates according to the results.

[CommittedDem]

Obama had ads runnings all over Florida. Fundraising was not illegal. In fact, Obama held fundraisers there early on.

[csepwede]

so you're fine with suppressing Obama's vote in Florida and Michigan?

unacceptable.

[JonStewart4President]

Fact is a national ad campaign is just that, national and yes that means you can't just "cut out" states that ads are in. That wasn't a violation of the rules, because of that.

Hillary left her name on the ticket even though she herself said, it's on tape, that 'the votes wouldn't count.' She herself said so. Her campaign put out a statement in 2007 saying that they fully abided by the decision of the DNC to strip both FL and MI of their delegates for their violation. Hillary, along with all the other contestants, signed a pledged to abide by the rules and not campaign OR participate (and taking the votes of them, is participation) of FL and MI.

Hillary didn't care or say one word about those votes until she needed them. She signed a pledge saying they wouldn't matter and she broke her word only when it benefited her.

And the turnout of both those states was much lower than other primaries or even previous primary elections in those states because hundreds of thousands, and according to Hillary's people at the RBC, potentially millions of people, stayed home because they were told their votes didn't matter. So talk about "disenfran­chisement.­"

Those are the real facts.

[readerK]

JonStewart­4President­: Last March, C-SPAN aired a a segment of the DNC BLC meeting at which the Rules were approved. There was no exception made for a national ad buy. The prohibition was against advertising, period!

Again, leaving a name on the ballot was not a violation of the rules. Nor is taking a name off the ballot an adherence to any rule, although it was in the spirit of the rules.

Millions may have not voted in FL and MI, you say. But about 600,000 in MI and 1.7 million in FL voted. These numbers dwarf the numbers of people who voted at many caucuses. The question is whether the DNC has the right to enforce its own rules in a way that looks unethical, partial and corrupt.

One candidates, against the rules, advertises probably in the two sanctioned states; his workers or supporters campaign for a slot on the ballot; and he prevents re-votes in the two states; but the DNC ROBS ANOTHER CANDIDATE TO GIVE AN ADVANTAGE TO THE ONE WHO SEEMED TO BREAK RULES, and it's OK with you!

[Ndw]

I think if this 'charming, salty woman' had been, instead, a man, you'd be all over her, and the fur would fly in blind outrage.

Is there a word for a female misogynist? Because after reading this, I think there should be.

I should add, though it shouldn't be important, that I am a woman. But this is ridiculous. Women aren't children, & they should not get a pass where a man would be stoned to death for such comments.

[GwenElle]

Ndw, you ask "Is there a word for a female misognynist?" Yes, though not specific to females, misandry is the hatred of men. I am not way assigning that label to Ms Christian. I'm just answering the question (assuming it was not rhetorical).

[jesselee26]

wow. thanks mr. bower. another loose cannon fresh from the woodpile for fox. cause we all know that's what the democrats need more of. appreciate it. really, i do. but hey, at least she's a really ADEQUATE loose cannon.

[csepwede]

ok,

I've reached my limit. The intellectually dishonest contortions by the Clinton camp has officially pushed me over the edge.

I'm with Harriet Christian, I'm a lifelong Democrat, and should Hillary Clinton get the nomination, I'm writing in Obama.

[aricogfj]

We had a problem because of the DNC Rules that were applied and weather you are or not, this is where are are and we needed to get a compromise. The Clintons would not accept anything that was not 100 percent of what they wanted. Should Barack, an unknow candidate in Feb, be forced to accept an election where he or she did not get to campign.

I do see any attempt at fairness of the Clinton side. Look at what Donna Brazile said about the meeting off camer....they would not accept the olive branch.

Yes I do look down on Harriet and her friends that think like her.

[readerK]

I am surprised that you don't see the repulsively nonsensical nature of what Brazille said. A 50-50 split would have given Obama much more than he deserved. Brazille and her colleagues took "only" 4 votes from Hillary and gave it to Obama. And she has the nauseating chutzpa to expect the Clintonites to extend an olive branch to Obama?

It's like my robbing you of $5, when I could have robbed you of $12. Would you want Brazille to tell you that you should extend an olive branch to me, because I didn't take all that I could have taken?

And Brazille has been saying that she is "uncommitted"!

[JayHorus]

What is it that you don't get? I mean is reading comprehension even taught in schools these days?? Listen...s­igh...ther­e was NO primary in Florida and Michigan. Not a valid one. Unfortunately because those states broke the rules they were punished, fairly or unfairly. It doesn't matter how many votes theoretically came out of those two primary's because they didn't count. Not one candidate had any delegates from FL/MI until the RBC alloted them. What the RBC did was to give back Delegates to the states at 50%, which should have been the punishment in the first place. You can thank Harold Ickes, as well as others, for the 100% removal of delegates. The RBC applied those delegates after listening to the Democratic Party of both FL/MI and what the representatives of the Democratic party for those states said was more in line with the will of their voters. You may not like that, but those are the facts. Also, for the record Donna Brazille said she was "Undeclared" not uncommitted. She was actually in favor of not having ANY of the delegates seated, but she went along with the majority vote as she has said she would do on numerous occasions.

[Ping]

Harriet is a feminist, she's not really a Democrat.

[Cunningham]

Feminists don't glory in tags like "testicular fortitude" and "3 cojones" and they don't compare themselves to Rocky Balboa. None of them are feminists.

[Ping]

Anyone who mouths the words, "I'm voting for McCain." is NOT a Democrat.

[nyhfrog]

I have no problem with voters being angry at injustice. I simply maintain as I will until the day I die that the rage is misdirected. This is not Obama or the DNC's fault.

It is the fault of the legislatures of two states who risked the disenfranchisement of the voters they represented to prove a political point.

Be angry with them and vote them out whether they are Republican or Democrat. If you voted in Florida or Michigan your legislatures failed you.

[JayDDrew]

Amen.

It is only out of fear of a backlash in November that the DNC agreed to give Michigan and Florida even half votes. They deserved absolutely nothing. And the voters of those two states need to blame their own legislatures, not Obama, not the DNC. Strong Clinton supporters, foremost Mr. Ickes, made the decison back in 2007.

This had nothing to do with Clinton being female or Obama being black. Anyone who sees it in either light is either sexist or racist. To say some type of warped, backlashed affirmative action influenced the decision of the DNC is as illogical as the many Clinton arguments rationalizing how she was "winning" the nomination.

This is the old "I'm not a racist, but..." If you have to qualify it like that before you make your point, then you're not as colorblind as you wish to believe you are.

Are you reading this, Geraldine Ferraro?

[ElkoJohn]

`
i agree,
however, the DNC should have lead the charge
against the dem leaders in each state who did this
before even stating a compromise
those leaders guilty of starting this mess should have
been required to resign to allow for new officials to
be selected
.

[mawrm]

The lady is an uninformed, unrepentant, lying bigot and you can tell by her language. Notice her phrase "Why is it okay for _a black_ to say that whites are racist when 99% of the blacks don't know why they're voting for him (Obama)... I'm saying 99% of blacks are voting for Obama because he's black". The wording "a black" harkens back to the days of segregation. 99%?!?! Tells you what she thinks the mental capacity of Afr-Ams are...

She claims to have worked for civil rights but can't name a damn thing she did.
She claims 75% of tickets to the DNC meeting were given to Obama supporters - another big fat lie
She claims FOX's competitors are constantly covering up everything he's done.... On what planet?!?
She asks why Obama didn't leave TUCC after all the racist things the pastor had said - nevermind that what got Rev. Wright in trouble was NOT that he'd said anything racist, it was his "G_d damn America" and "chickens come home to roost" that had absolutely NOTHING to do with race but was offensive to Americans of ALL races.

It's truly pathetic when it's Cavuto trying to reason with her to sane thinking.

See this sad piece of work
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no6ENZdbVi0

We can thank HRC for bringing these latent bigots in the Dem party to light.

[PaulLoeb]

Maybe you should have listened to Clinton telling New Hampshire Public Radio that the Michgan primary wouldn't count so it was fine to stay on the ballot. Her words: "this election they're having is not going to count for anything."

As I see it you riled someone up to give John McCain ammuntion, to make at least borderline racial comments, and to throw a bouquet to Fox News. Whoever you supported or worked for in the past, however much you like Hillary Clinton to me your actions and Christian's, were unexcusable.

[memcs]

I think Harriet sounded drunk.

[ladyfractal]

I'm curious. What would an 'adequate' black candidate look like? Why do I have the feeling that there is NO black candidate that would be adequate, particularly if that candidate was running against someone Ms Christian supported?

Let's call things as they are. All of these suggestions that Obama is an affirmative action hire on a grand scale is racism, pure and simple. I know of what I speak. I graduated with high marks as an undergrad, did my M.S and PhD in bioinformatics and guess what, people mistake me for an affirmative action hire. Why? Not because I'm incompetent. NOT because I don't produce (I publish papers). But because I'm a black woman and therefore incompetent.

This is a wake-up call. Black people, understand what your 'friends' in the Democratic party think of you; you are useful fools but you had better understand that you are there for the votes and to make people feel better than Republicans because Democrats are so much more diverse. Throughout this campaign I have heard white Democrats make comments that would have them screaming for the head of George Allen or Trent Lott had they said the *exact same thing*.

And before someone mentions it, yes, black folks know that we really are caught between the scylla and Charybdis. We'll vote Democratic because there is no other option other than to not vote, which is no option. But the message is clear and received.

Cheers
LF

[neocon666]

To paraphrase what Malcolm X said about republicans and democrats: republicans say let's keep the N-words under control, while democrats say lets keep the African-Americans under control.

[Charmed]

It's starting to ring so true. I'm so sick of the double standards. Hillary can say anything and her supporters and the media immediately explain what she meant (even the assassination comment). Everything someone says is Obama's fault. Once Obama make it, I will NEVER be a democrat again. If Obama wasn't running under this party I wouldn't vote for anybody in this party. Hillary did feel entitled to this nomination but one thing is true the truth is just something that doesn't work for most of the people.

[WorkingClass]

I think it was Kinky Friedman who said "after God made Republicans, he gave up on everything else".

[fair1234]

I have been sayine everything you just said for weeks. My sister told me that she thinks their maybe more racists democrats than racists republicans. I have heard so much racial comments from Hillary supporters it would make you gag. Hillary should have released a statement to her supporters that if you are voting againts Obama because he is black, then I donot need your vote but she chose not to do so. It makes me feel sad this is America in 2008 and we have made just a little progress. More needs to be done. Obama has been called a monkey in california and other choice racist names but he does not complain and continues because he believes in this country. I am so with you LF you have no idea!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­1111

[Sabreen60]

Every African American I know, including myself, have always voted for the "lesser of two evils". I think most of us what the deal is and we also know that the Democratic Party cannot win the WH without us. The racists are coming out the woodwork. BUT I have seen and heard more white people stand up for a black man then I thought I would ever see in my lifetime.

[FweetyBigalow]

Well, if you look into the history of both of the parties democrats didn't start out being the party for african americans, but evolved into this. I absolutely agree with you on this because it seems like no matter what, minorities are presumed to have been given some type of unfair advantage instead of being given credit for working just as hard--in many cases much harder to get where they are. It is painful to have someone look down on you when you know that you've put everything you have intellectually, emotionally, and spiritually into achieving a goal and then to have someone like this lady still look down on you, all with the presumption that they are entitled to all the best in life. Everyone else can have what's left over. Speaking from experience it's sickening, frustrating, and very sad.