Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Civil Rights – So Passé?

By

How Civil Rights are Treated on Candidates Web Pages

Democrats

  • Clinton – No Civil Rights mention in Issues list.
  • Edwards – The Rights Of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgendered Americans
  • Gravel – Without categorizing them as civil rights, Gravel highlights Women’s Rights & LGBT Rights on his Issues page
  • Kucinich – has a section called Rights Issues, which includes Animal Rights, Civil Liberties, DC Statehood, Disability Rights, Immigrants’ Rights, LGBTQ Rights, Patriot Act, Reproductive Rights, Voting Rights, Water as a Human Right.
  • Obama – Nothing about Civil Rights in general, although there is a Voting Rights item on his Issues tab.  Kinda surprising really, since he wants to be known for his career in civil rights advocacy.  He has a “People” page linked to the main page that has a tab for LGBT, Students, Women, People of Faith and Environmentalists.  The LGBT tab naturally contains civil rights issues, although you will not find the term “civil rights” used there.  You will, however, find “civil unions” mentioned numerous times (aka uncivil rights? 😉
  • Richardson – Richardson names Civil Liberties as a priority on his Issues page.  Items included are Choice, Expanding Equal Rights [for LGBTs], Protection for Native Americans, Count Every Vote, No Torture, A Free and Open Internet.  Not bad.

    Republicans

  • Brownback – No mention of Civil Rights, but kudos to him for having a Human Rights bit on his issues page.  Sadly, if your human rights plight does not rise to the level of Darfur or Rwanda, he isn’t intersted.
  • Giuliani – No Civil Rights with Rudy.  Interestingly, he does have an Issues section on Judges.  He favors the flavor of Scalia, Roberts and Alito.
  • McCain – No Civil Rights tab in the McTool chest.
  • Ron Paul – working hard to undo the PATRIOT Act!  Listed under “Privacy & Personal Liberty” on the Issues page.
  • Romney – Willard has Issues all right, but doesn’t seem concerned with civil rights.
    Please share widely!
    fb-share-icon
    Tweet
    0

    • Comments

      • how did you navigate to that lgbt page?  i didn’t see it when looking at the “issues” page.  could it be that he doesn’t want it to be too obvious to non-lgbt people? 

        <

        p>
        i think my point still stands that few candidates, obama included, are choosing to use the term “civil rights” as a focal point.  like obama, they like distributing civil rights issues among other issues.  if i knew nothing of obama and was scanning the issues list for the first time, i never would have thought that civil rights per se were a priority to him.  freedom to unionize can certainly be related to “fighting poverty”, but if you care deeply about civil rights, why not list it visibly on a “civil rights” page.

        • Top level menu has choices: Home – Learn -Issues – Get Involved – Blog – States – People – Donate.  Choose “People”.  LGBT is right there, second on the list before “People of Faith”. (BTW, I love that Obama is reaching out to both of these communities – and that “People of Faith” have to scroll right past “LBGT”!).  By comparison, you’d have to dig deeper into Edwards’ site to find a LGBT reference, and I didn’t find one at the top level of Clinton’s site either. 

          <

          p>
          It stretches credulity a bit to claim that someone trying to learn about Obama from his website wouldn’t be able to figure out that civil rights are important to him – his biographical information on the site includes that he was a civil rights attorney and taught constitutional law, and the Voting Rights page is plenty clear on the subject.

          <

          p>
          That said, I don’t know about your wider point – whether there has been a shift away from using the term “civil rights” to embrace voting rights, right to organize, lgbt rights etc.  Do you know if Dems in recent past presidential elections organized issues under the “civil rights” rubric? 

          • i freely admit that i don’t have the patience to dig through web pages to see if something i might want to see may be in there.  i was specifically looking to see if civil rights was addressed as such on the issues page.  i look at a candidate’s issues page, and if i like it, then i read their bio.  if i like that, i may pick further through the site.

            <

            p>
            why do you suppose that obama chose to put lgbt and faith on a tab that wasn’t focusing you on what he sees at the issues?  i know a candidate’s web page can’t do everything, but i always find it sad that people seem to want to separate ‘people of faith’ and ‘lgbt’ into two different groups.  they overlap quite heavily.  i’m glad he does have some blurbs on lgbt supporters on the testimonials part of the faith page.  i’m not necessarily criticizing obama, i’m just wondering why he and others are doing things the way they are.

            <

            p>
            as for how candidates delt with civil rights last time, i have no idea.  kennedy currently has a “promotion of civil rights” section on his agenda page.

            • Laurel is (gasp) a low information voter 😉

              <

              p>

              i freely admit that i don’t have the patience to dig through web pages to see if something i might want to see may be in there.

              <

              p>
              I can’t speak for Obama’s campaign, obviously, but if I had to venture a guess for why the site is organized as it is, it’s to foster organizing around communities.  Obama wants to run from the grassroots.  The site has a lot of social networking tools to connect people who are interested in the campaign. 

              <

              p>
              I’d also guess that he sees poverty and economic justice issues as intertwined with civil rights.

              • that it’s risky to make the leap from “hey, that guy was a civil rights attorney and taught Con Law” from “hey, civil rights are important to that guy,” at least in the sense that I assume you mean that civil rights are “important” to someone.

                • that the candidate is supportive of civil rights – to those who actually want to learn about the candidate and  spend some time reading what’s posted there. 

                  <

                  p>
                  I didn’t assert that civil rights attorney + con law prof = supporter of civil rights.  That’s your straw man – but have fun knocking it around. 

                  <

                  p>

    3. Politicians tend to have a sense where the public is going.  The trick is to find where the public is aimed and then jump in front of the parade to “lead” it.  With all these serious political leaders and their staffs finding no interest by society in “individual rights” or “civil rights”, the writing is on the wall.  The public at large really doesn’t care.  Some people may moan about the Patriot Act because it is mentioned in the media, but no one has even noticed the last executive order.  (And, I have to laugh at “Free Speech Zones”, but neither party is against them.) 

      <

      p>
      The pressing issues are far too large regarding environment, population growth, housing, terrorism and other crimes to worry about “civil rights”.  “Civil rights”, indeed, are much to blame for many of the problems we encounter with the pressing issues. 

      <

      p>
      There are some organizations that seek special rights and the politicians least pay lip service to these groups.  These are the only real “rights” concerns, be they unions, businesses, sexual preference, religion, etc.

      <

      p>
      The ideas of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution are over 200 years old.  Society has changed and the world has changed.  The “New World Order” is about solving the world’s problems with social control.  We only have to look to China to see what effective leadership can do to bring a country into the modern age in less than 40 years. 

      <

      p>
      What can be done for the world using the same type of contols? 

    5. thank you to whoever (whomever?) corrected my spelling fo pah 😀

      <

      p>
      i will be away from my computer for several days.  so, when you don’t see a reply from me to an interesting comment, don’t think i’m giving anyone the Big Ig!

    Archives