John Eaves: Dirty Racist. David Duke Apologized Too.

I am as unconvinced by John Eaves’ apologies over his radio ad as I was back when David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana and apologized for his past. And Eaves’s apology is as much a non-apology as Duke’s was back then.

On Monday, Eaves said he was sorry for the advertisement that has had Republican officials buzzing and threatening reprisals ever since.

“If people were offended by it, I apologize,

13 comments

  1. ColinATL says:

    Erick, I really don’t understand your constant harping on this ad. It wasn’t Eaves’ finest hour, but I’m sure you’ve forgiven other politicians over their campaign flubs. Do you get this angry at Saxby over his Osama/Cleland ads back in 2002? I certainly am still angry about that, but you don’t see me complaining about it every day.

    But Saxby’s day will come. 🙂 Just you wait for 2008, Saxby! Although, if our candidate is Vernon Jones, I won’t be supporting that dud. 🙂

  2. atlantaman says:

    “It wasn’t race-baiting. It was sent to all Democratic households.”

    I’d love to know what percentage of Democrat households in Fulton County are black. Since the statwide average is over 50%, Fulton County has got to be a lot higher then that.

    Now Shirley says she was only talking about “right-wing” Republicans not regualar republicans. But the ad was for John Eaves who was running against Lee Morris. Lee is one of the most moderate republicans on the planet, so I’m not sure if I understand the inference – is it that all Republicans are right-wing?

  3. ugadog says:

    While I’m white, I think that that African-Americans should be afforded a little slack in this country for what they’ve been through and what they are currently going through. I don’t think he should have apologized. That’s a part of African-American’s history and if he wants to inspire African-Americans to vote by appealing to history, by all means proceed.

  4. atlantaman says:

    “I think that that African-Americans should be afforded a little slack in this country for what they’ve been through and what they are currently going through.”

    No question their ancestors have been through a lot, not quite sure what they are currently going through in Atlanta. Since every single major elected office is held by an African American in Atlanta/Fulton County I think it would be difficult to make the case that there is all that much oppression here.

    Just out of curiosity at what generation do you draw the line. Something tells me the descendants of Leo Frank are not invoking his name as a free pass that exonerates them of everything.

  5. Atlantaman, your math seems a little off. According to the Fox News exit poll, Taylor got 32% of white votes. Whites made up 78% of the electorate. Multiple those together and you find that just shy of 1 out of every 4 Georgia voters (24.9%) are white Democrats. Seeing as how only 22% of voters were non-white (and only 18% of them were black, and not all of them voted for Taylor) you can see that white Democrats, statewide, outnumber white Republicans.

    Now Fulton has a higher percentage of African Americans than many counties, but it also has more liberal white Democrats. Eaves racked up a huge margin countywide, and my favorite statistic of the entire election night, even though she was cruising to election statewide, the voters who knew Karen Handel best (Fulton voters) opted for her opponent Gail Buckner.

    Seriously guys, give this story a rest. In 2002, Sonny Perdue ran an entire campaign that was based on white racial resentment towards black Atlantans. And the press has barely spilled a drop of ink examining that or calling on Perdue to apologize. This was just one ad. Let it go.

  6. Meant to say white Democrats outnumber black Democrats.

    But I’ll answer another point, before Eaves was elected, every major office in Fulton was NOT held by a black Democrat. Karen Handel was installed an a low turnout special election dominated by Republican North Fulton voters after Mike Kenn resigned to become a lobbyist.

    Kenn had no intent of serving a full term, yet by running he guaranteed that taxpayers would foot the bill of a special election that would disadvantage Democratic candidates, who usually do best in general elections. There is no way Karen would have won on election day in 2002. While the language in the ad may have been a little over the top, (black) Democrats in Fulton (and DeKalb) have been screwed by Republican trickery to fill offices like County Commission Chair (in Fulton) and DA and Solicitor General (in DeKalb).

    Of course we end up winning those offices back at the next general election, but you can’t deny that the Republicans try their hardest to thwart the will of black and Democratic voters in metro Atlanta every chance they get.

  7. bird says:

    This ad was inflammatory, but this is not the worst thing to be thrown around in an election. The Dixiecrats who migrated to the Republican party were segregationists. See Strom Thurmond. The hoses were turned on blacks just about 40 years ago. That isn’t that far back. I wouldn’t have made the ad, but this outrage is out of order. It is absurd to compare this guy to Dukes, who was the head of a violent racist organization.

  8. ugavi says:

    Hardcore,
    Are you kidding – 4 of the 7 current members of the FulCo Commission are black – Darnell, Boxhill, Edwards, and Pitts. Don’t forget Howard (DA), Ferdinand (Tax Commissioner). Their both elected officials.

    Kenn (white male) won in a general election. Did you speak to Kenn or anyone close to Kenn about his “intent to serve a full term”.

    In Handel’s special election there were two democrats (both black females), and two republications (including Handel). She won in a 4-way race without a run-off.

    The ad was raciest and designed to get blacks out to vote. I haven’t looked at the turnout numbers, but have heard that the strategy worked and black voter turnout was high in Fulton.

  9. jkga says:

    Okay, count me confused. What’s the definition of “racist” that is being used here? “Racially inflammatory”, maybe. I can see where right wing republicans might feel offended by a statement that they are equivalent to the racists of the recent past, but accusing someone of racism (fairly or not) is not the same as being racist.

  10. RuralDem says:

    Well…. they did mention “right-wing”

    What they did was wrong, but it is nothing to keep getting worked up about.

    Besides, this post was really good until the last two paragraphs. I’m sick of both sides whining about the media bias. Those who say that CNN are biased say Fox News is not and vice versa.

  11. gatormathis says:

    While race-baiting might be the word for the day, you bout as well get over it. Cause you just ain’t dealing with the same intellect as you were 40 years ago.

    What I mean is, even the “ignorant” folks these days got “sense”.

    What ever “class, “color”, “ethnic group”, “religion”, or any other sub-divide you may have, people are hard headed as hell when it comes to making their mind up. Even more so when a “choice” is involved.

    If you pin someone down to an immediate answer, they will give you one, along with justifications. If the situation involves money, expect even more consideration and dialogue.

    Why is this you may ask?

    How many people do you know who can’t read at all? You can find “stuff” to read these days just laying around.

    Then you have other sources of info such as the TV, computer, radio, all the “souped-up” versions of the above, but above all, the daily “gossip”.

    You know what I mean Vern……….the daily water cooler/coffee pot/coffee shop banter that occurs everyday. And this conversation usually occurs amongst the afore-mentioned, “different groups” of people.

    People that work or otherwise co-habitat around other usually worry about each other, pull for each other, help each other as the need arises.

    They pay taxes, have aspirations for themselves and their families, and always want a better life for the ones behind them. It’s the way it has always been.

    People from other countries don’t hide in the bottom of boats and trucks to sneak into the USA because they want to be mistreated and oppressed. They come for oppurtunity.

    You can claim whichever group you want voted for your favorite candidate, but the candidate with the most votes won.

    In the statewide list, it bounced between Republicans and Democrats. As you look at the winners and their totals, you can tell a similiar majority played all the way through.

    People vote for candidates for numerous reasons, but from the results of the past election, it’s easy to see, people are voting on who they believe more than old fashioned scare tactics.

    Funny thing, a few more elections ahead in this electronic age we live in today, candidates will have to really be candidates unto the people instead of a just sound bites and inuendo.

    Soon you won’t be able to rely on party, race, or the other old standby routines, you will have to be for real. Otherwise, you will be simply rejected.

    When this occurs, that’s when elections will really be interesting.

  12. atlantaman says:

    “Funny thing, a few more elections ahead in this electronic age we live in today, candidates will have to really be candidates unto the people instead of a just sound bites and inuendo.”

    Sounds great, but I think it’s wishful thinking. You can have all the information in the world available, but can’t force people to read it. In the age of MTV and “The Bachelor” people’s attention spans are getting smaller and they expect everything in 10 second sound bites. Actually researching a candidate is too difficult – it takes time away from Ophrah and Dr. Phil. Just tell me who George Clooney is voting for.

    Have you seen the basic history test that was randomly given to Ivy League students? The majority of the students couldn’t tell you what decade the Civil War was fought in. Americans are getting dumber not smarter.

Comments are closed.