Calling out candidates who don't directly address issues important to blacks isn't charging racism

[bigtree]

40. you're reading this wrong

...Sen. Sanders isn't going to satisfy me by just resting on his past. All of these candidates need to vocalize their positions on these issues, repeatedly, in this election. That's the only way they will make any impact on these issues, with their repeated advocacy.

It's not just a matter of me getting an answer on some talk show, it's about whether these candidates are willing to invest their rhetoric and political capital in this campaign on behalf of these issues - just like folks expect these candidates to do on economic issues.

Now, I've got faith in Sanders, and I'd have no qualms about his presidency, if elected. Granted, he's not my choice right now in this primary (I'm an O'Malley supporter). However, I'm directing my admonition to ALL of the candidates, not just Sanders. There's much more to advocating on these issues that I've summarily outlined (I'd include voting rights, as well) than generalizing about 'racial and economic justice.' Indeed, there's much more that I'd like to see from our Democratic candidates than a mention or two on a radio show.

I think folks who believe that would be enough to propel those issues into the national debate in this election are being unrealistic; or who believe that pointing to past positions as proof of positions on issues like policing, immigration, LGBT rights in the workplace and elsewhere will suffice really don't understand the nature of presidential campaigns. It will take commitment to specific policies and issues to make a real difference in those interests and concerns. They need to directly address specific initiatives and make commitments on them. Otherwise we can expect little more than a pig in a poke when it comes to legislating them into action or law.

Read the part of my op where I say how I'm looking forward to more on these issues in the year ahead...