« Clinton Glasnost Update | Main | HRC Talking Points On Civil Rights »

The Crucible Of Racial Politics

11 Jan 2008 09:18 pm

Race and gender have always been subtexts of the Democratic presidential race, and for the first time, really, since this whole thing began, they've become fully fledged texts. One reporter even claims that racial politics is "roiling" the Democratic race.

Today, former President Clinton appeared on prominent black radio talk show programs to tamp down a wave of concerns that his calling Barack Obama's candidacy a "fairy tale" was racially insensitive. One by one, to hosts Steve Harvey, Michael Basin and Al Sharpton, Clinton professed his admiration for Obama and insisted that he was only referring to Obama's lack of executive experience.

In turn, the Clinton campaign has accused the Obama campaign of artificially ginning up the controversy. Clinton aides seized on reports that an Obama press aide, in response to a research query from a prominent activist, included remarks by the Clintons in a compilation of racially insensitive remarks. Hillary Clinton said the accusations about her comments were "baseless and divisive," ABC News reported tonight.

The compilation produced by the press aide starts with New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's linking Obama's style at press conferences to "Shuck and Jive." The next heading in capital letters reads: "MARTIN LUTHER KING / LYNDON JOHNSON COMPARISON." The story excerpt includes Hillary Clinton's remark that Pres. Lyndon Johnson was instrumental to the passage of civil rights laws. Then the document features Bill Clinton's assertion that Hillary Clinton is "stronger than Nelson Mandela," former Clinton adviser Billy Shaheen's plea to the press to focus on Obama's youthful drug use, Mark Penn's invocation of the word "cocaine" when trying to defend Shaheen.

There is no evidence that the campaign circulated the compilation to reporters, or to anyone aside from the activist who requested the information.

Obama has not accused the Clintons of racism and an Obama campaign aide said that campaign does not believe that the Clintons themselves were attempting to sow racial discord. Nonetheless, several powerful black politicians and political activists, including Donna Brazile and Rep. James Clyburn, say they detect, in a pattern of curious remarks, a string of questions designed to raise the issue of race. Brazile has not endorsed a presidential candidate.

"Somehow, this story is being used to create a wedge or divide," Brazile told me via e-mail. "What we have is two historic candidates battling to become the first. Meanwhile, old wounds have been reopened and now it's a mess."

Clyburn, for his part, seemed to back away from a decision to endorse.

In a statement released late today by his press office, he says he "told the DNC, the South Carolina Democratic Party and the South Carolina General Assembly that I would do everything I could to ensure this first in the South primary is a success. My position and my focus remain the same, and I have conveyed that to the campaigns of Senators Obama, Clinton and Edwards."

“I encourage the candidates to be sensitive about the words they use. This is an historic race for America to have such strong, diverse candidates vying for the Democratic nomination. I want what is best for South Carolina and the nation – a successful South Carolina primary and a strong Democratic nominee.”

Obama, the son of a black man and a white woman, has been variously described as a "post-racial" candidate or a black candidate with "cross-over" appeal, both terms loaded with implications that Obama probably does not subscribe too. For one thing, his identity is unique; he's written a book about the pulls and pushes of racial solidarity and culture, so he probably understands, at a gut level better than anyone else in the race, why identity politics is so poisonous.

Some of his fans love Obama as a concept more than a man: his election, they believe, will expiate America's original and enduring sin, that of racial subjugation and slavery. Conservative critics of Obamas, like Thomas Sowell, urge him to use his candidacy as a teachable moment for other African Americans about race and culture; older, liberal activists, like Jesse Jackson, have accused him of not acting black enough, whatever that means. It is to Obama's credit that he has forged a completely independent way of inhabitng his identity. He has graciously allowed others to use him as a canvass, but he never quite reflects what they want to see. Indeed, Obama himself has made much more modest claims, and he has never overtly appealed to African Americans on the basis of his skin color or theirs. That is not his generational point of view.

If the Clinton campaign is percieved as resorting to race-baiting in South Carolina, they're super-duper-dead-in-the-water. And rightfully so, if they're a deliberate strategy to raise any questions whatsoever about Obama and race. But -- really -- the Clintons?

Instead of answering questions, I'll pose some more:

Did white women in New Hampshire reject a black candidate, thereby confirming the idea of a white curtain in the Democratic Party? Will South Carolina become a battle for the favor of black women, who are pulled, from the standpoint of identity politics, in two different directions?

One thing is certain: it's tough for people to figure out how to talk about a black candidate, including the campaign of the black candidate himself.

Comments (118)

I don't think anybody thinks the Clintons are racist but clearly there is a pattern here, at least tolerated if not encouraged. I don't hate the Clintons but I don't think they are above doing what it takes to win. Remember that she considers this is to be "the fun part".
Clearly a large part of the African American community is outraged and it has spread since the first incidents. The cocaine thing pissed off a lot of people but by now, there are too many of these "misunderstandings" for them to calm down.
The issue that may arise for Obama though, and that would be unfair considering what you rightfully say about the way he sees himself and ignores racial appeal, is that there also may be a backlash of a backlash among some white folks who can support Obama but could desert as soon as any whiff of blackness comes from him (it is sad but that's the way it is).
Just the same way I can sense among people around me (men) a certain annoyance at how Hillary used - intentionally or not - the woman card in NH.

What a mess.

There definitely seems to be a pattern of Clinton aides and supporters making racially insensitive comments. You'd have to be very naive about politics to think this was all unintentional.

The fact that the campaign went on the defensive against the weakest possible example (the "fairy tale" comments) and then accused the Obama campaign of "artificially ginning up the controversy" tells me this was definitely part of a strategy from them. They want to make it look like Obama's playing the race card. If they can get reporters to cover this story their way (and there's no reason to think they won't), it'll work in their favor.

It's instructive -- in so many ways -- that the same kind of ... mistake? misunderstanding? ... keeps recurring. Her campaign is trying to put us in our our place.

You say at the end "The Clintons?"
Marc, what you fail to realize is the all consuming need to hold on to and accumulate more and more power is the driving force of the Clinton campaign.
The need to be in the spotlight long after they should have gracefully retreated, Bill's compulsive need for applause and both Clinton's addiction to power and keeping it is what their whole life is about.
To stoop to race baiting, either through surrogates or themselves, is not surprising. They are driven by their addiction to power and the limelight.
And like any junkie, are driven to do things thought unbelievable in order to get that fix.
Even when the news services have constantly corrected Bill on his lies about Obama and iraq, he is even today still saying them.
Hillary is in Nevada giving the impression that Obama is 'shiftless and lazy' to voters.
I don't find it at all surprising. They are not above doing literally anything to regain the white house. I suspect this is why Kucinich is asking for a recount. He knows the clintons would even stoop to vote tampering.
I'm not saying they did but, just that they are capable if they get desperate enough.
As a white person, I have been alarmed by the increasingly racial undertones of the remarks coming from the campaign and have long suspected them of keeping that Is He Black Enough silliness going for so long.
I put nothing past the Clintons.

Obama has refused to inject race into this election. Why? because a black candidate talking about race doesn't go very far and that isn't who he is.

But remember, the clinton's don't make these kind of mistakes. Everything they do has a reason. All their toeing of the race line has one intention, to talk about a subject Obama won't bring up. If all the crazies from the black movement go nuts, all the white voters toying with backing Obama will recoil.

The clintons are willing to give up the black vote so Obama loses the white vote.

What was the purpose of saying "shuck and jive"? What descriptive water did it carry? Why would Shaheen on the eve of a primary decide to tell a reporter for a national newspaper that he was worried that Obama would be mistaken for a drug dealer? When Penn went on air after the debate there was absolutely no need for him to bring up cocaine, again, especially after his boss had allegedly apologized? Are we to assume that these paid political consultants somehow just forget themselves in national media? Especially when, some would argue, they had something to gain from it. In other words, they did not have to go there, but they did. As for the fairy tale comment. Clinton was talking about Obama's position on the war, but he quoted him out of context. So, as a matter of fact, it is not a fairy tale at all. Obama stood before a crowd and predicted what would happen and it did. Then he voted to support the troops. Clinton understands that, I am sure he does. Obama's criticism of Clinton was that her decision to vote for the war was either one of principle or one of politics, but she would not commit to either. That is no fairy tale. The sad thing is that Clinton could have taken the high road, but for whatever reason they did not. This is not just academic, Marc, a lot of people have been offended. It's just sad. I wish the Clintons could have worked hard to get Gore in the White House, instead of fighting to keep Obama out of it. I don't think Obama has taken that route, and for that I am grateful.

how come there is now talk about jesse jackson jr., obama's co-chair who said Hillary's tears melted the granite state, but we have to look at those tears in context and question if those tears were for katrina victims.

Or how about supporters like Chris Rock who said, think about it, do you want to look back later on 50 years down the road and say I voted for a old white lady instead of potentially voting for the first black president.

I mean if Andrew Cuomo, who is a Clinton supporter, but not a part of her campaign can be cruciifed, why shouldn't Chris Rock, or Jesse Jackson Jr., who is a part of the campaign.

In my opinion, there is too much political correctness in America, and there is a double standard. Black people can address each other in specific ways, or they can use racist terms against white people, but anything that has some sort of negative racial connotation allows black people to label you as a racist.

THis is not a path the Obama campaign should go. Criticizing Obama's experience is not racist.

Tell you what, I'll give the Clintons the benefit of the doubt when their campaign officials stop saying things like this (Clinton advisor quoted in The Guardian):

"If you have a social need, you're with Hillary. If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend and you're young and you have no social needs, then he's cool."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2238148,00.html

To quote Bill Clinton, give me a break.

I am a minority in this country. Clintons have done more for civil rights and for such a long time than all the Obama supporters who are using this as a wedge issue in a divisive way. The Obama supporters are deliberately misinterpreting partial and incomplete quotes and expressing insincere and false outrage in their short-term goal to win the South Carolina primary for their candidate. They and the Obama campaign are playing with fire in doing this. They will do irreparable harm to the Democratinc party and cause long-term harm to race relations in this country.

They may or may not win the South Carolina campaign with this strategy. But, they will for sure lose any legitimacy they have as a campaign of hope and unity. The supporters of Obama are doing him no favors by pursuing this strategy. They have already alienated a lot of voters including me by their hatred towards Hillary Clinton. I have observed their venom and hatred in various blogs over the last month. I have become a stronger supporter of Hillary over the last month as a result.

Please stop!

The Clintons will do and say anything to get back in to the white house. This only proves it. If they can manage to turn this back around against Senator Obama, saying that he is the one playing the race card, then they have won again. When is this country going to wake up and see these two for what they are. As John Kerry said, they only care about themselves and power.

With regard to the "fairy tale" comment, one of the commenters above correctly notes that this was the weakest example of racial insensitivity coming from camp Clinton, and therefore Bill chose to use it as the example to respond to.

The "fairy tale" comment was about how Bill Clinton thinks that Obama does not deserve credit for being a consistent war opponent, and in that regard it is a different kind of Rovian tactic that Bill is engaged in: unjustly attempting to take away the opponent's strongest issue.

Here, that attempt fails. Bill Clinton is perpetrating his own fairytale, in which he attempts to strip from Obama his rightful advantage as the only Democratic candidate who had both judgment and courage on the Iraq war from the beginning.

Obama’s October 2002 speech against the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq has been well reported. Less well reported is that he followed up on that speech against the resolution with statements against the invasion itself, as it was nearing in March 2003.

First. On March 4, 2003, an Illinois newspaper, the Belleville News Democrat, reported this:

“Barack Obama is criticizing the idea of war against Iraq and challenging his Democratic opponents in the U.S. Senate race to take a stand on the question.... ‘What's tempting is to take the path of least resistance and keep quiet on the issue, knowing that maybe in two or three or six months, at least the fighting will be over and you can see how it plays itself out,’ said Obama, a state senator from Chicago.”

Second. On March 17, 2003, the Chicago Sun Times reported this:

“Thousands of demonstrators packed Daley Center Plaza for a two- hour rally Sunday [two days before Bush issued his ultimatum against Saddam], then marched through downtown in Chicago's largest protest to date against an Iraq war. Crowd estimates from police and organizers ranged from 5,000 to 10,000.... State Sen. Barack Obama (D-Chicago) told the crowd, ‘It's not too late’ to stop the war.” [

This is relevant for two reasons. First, it shows that Bill Clinton is deceiving the public when he tries to plant the idea that Obama equivocated about the war or was not against the war at all relevant times prior to its being launched by George W. Bush.

Second, it draws attention to Hillary Clinton’s own contradictions on the war. From the beginning of her Presidential campaign, Senator Clinton has said that “If I had been president in 2003, I would never have started this war.” See Feb. 11 Concord Monitor, “Clinton Reintroduces Herself as Presidential Candidate.” But no one has asked her – at any of the fifteen debates – whether why, if she harbored objections to Bush’s decision to pull the trigger on the war on March 18, 2003, she did not – in the critical March 2003 period – use her very prominent platform to speak out against the invasion and claim that it would be a misuse of the authority she voted to grant Bush.

If we credit Hillary’s assertion that she had objections to Bush’s decision to invade, and couple that assertion with the fact that Hillary did not voice those objections publicly, she is worse than someone who just happened to have bad judgment, she is someone who is claiming the mantle of the real leader and doer in this nomination campaign, and yet who was abjectly craven at the single most important moment of her Senate career.

So the real “fairytale” is the one Bill Clinton is trying to propagate by attempting to strip from Obama his rightful advantage as the one who had both judgment and courage on the Iraq war.

There is an important lesson that those who support Hillary Clinton need to know. She has made herself virtually unelectable through her alienation of the Black community. A dem can't win without a good turnout of Black votes. But with the smears of Obama as a muslim, a drug dealer, someone who "shucks and jives," the suspicsion of the Bradley effect in NH, the comments on MLK, etc, the Clintons in their desperation to win the primary have squandered their ability to win the general

Now, some Clinton people may think that they'll eventualy be able to con black voters back into the fold because they think black have no where else to go. But many Blacks may stay home and many Black may gravitate to Bloomberg, who I am certain will run if we nominate Hillary.

So a message to you white supporters of Hillary. Even if HIllary's foray into race politics doesn't offend you personally, you should be concerned that your candiate has become unelecatable. Hopefully Bloomberg will win in that scenario, but if a republican does, than you and your support of a racially divisive nomniee like HIllary will be resposible for a continuation of the war, a new war in Iran, and the overturning of Roe v Wade. Do you really want that on your consience?

Hillary can play the gender card with abandon because the majoirty of dem primary voters are women. Obama can't even forcefully respond to HIllary's race baiting because blacks are not a majority of the dem primary electorate and if Hillary succeeds in turning this primary into an identity politics, my tribe vs your tribe primary, then she will win. She has the bigger tribe. But if this primary is about transcending the tribal system, then Obama wins. Obama has to let some of HIllary's race baiting slide to avoid it beconing the topic of conversation. It's a tough position for his campaign to be in, but I think they can thread the needle.

I would hope that good democrats, black and white, will look at Hillary's divisive tactics as a mirror image of the Karl Rove playbook.

But how to fight back?

We have to make a distinction between the clintons being racists and the clintons using code words to appeal to racism in the electorate to won at all costs.

There is a distinction between the two.

But more importantly politically, if we Obama supporters accuse the Clintons of being racists personally - something none of us can know because we can't see into their hearts - it will probably backfire on to us because if the election becomes a race and gender war, we lose.

What is more important to point out is that we don't really know if the Clintons are racist or not, we are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but their use of rhetoric and code wods is racially divisive, it's bad for the party and the country, and its reminisent of the Republican playbook.

Even if there is racism among the clintons ar their campaign, it's not really in our interest to point it out loudly. It's best to contrast their divisive approach with our inclusive approach.

You know how Obama has a line saying "I don't want to pit Red America against Blue America?" I think he should expand it into a riff: "I don't want to pit male American against Female America. I don't want to pit Black America against White America against Latio America, etc, etc."

Maybe that calls too much attention to the issue, but I think Obama needs to find some way, as HIllary seeks to win by appealling to our baser instincts, to rise above and win by appealing to our better instincts. It's the only way he can win. He won't win an identity politics food fight.

I'd take the Clintons over John Kerry ANY DAY.

I, too, have become increasingly more supportive of Hillary over the past few weeks. It seems abundantly clear that the media failed to elbow out of the race in NH, so they are now screaming the 'race card' as the race heads to SC. It's really shameful - considering all the Clinton's have done for human rights and equality.

While I don't think this is a campaign tactic endorsed by Obama (whom I also admire) - his surrogates and supporters in the press are shameful.

I'd like to see Hillary win the nomination and I'd love to see her pick Obama as VP (he'd be great at mobilizing the country behind her far superior proposals and platform). Unfortunately, I don't see the opposite happening (Obama choosing Clinton) as the press wouldn't stand for it - and I don't think Obama has the stomach to resist.

Can somebody please explain why Clinton should be crucified over what Andrew Cuomo said. Andrew CUomo isn't even a part of her campaign, and when he said Shuck and Jive, he didn't refer to any of the candidates in particular.

I mean.. this is getting ridiculous.

Just a small correction: it's Michael Baisden, not Michael Basin.

Honestly, though, as others have said--once, maybe twice, I could look beyond this, but you've listed multiple instances from recent weeks where the Clinton campaign has said things that, in my view, constitute race baiting (and there are quite a few things that you left out, including the most recent "hip black friend" quote). Once or twice is a coincidence, beyond that, it's a pattern that should disturb us all.

Beyond the immediate ramifications (a primary loss in South Carolina, for instance), Clinton must think ahead to the general election. She has had little support from independents, so it's imperative that she turn out the Democratic base. Right now, as an African-American woman, I can't say for certain that I'd be willing to turn out for Hillary.

What has the Obama campaign descended to? Throwing the racism charges at the Clintons and the Cuomos? Clintons had the most minorities and women in their administration of any presidential administration. I am amused by the false outrage expressed here by the white supporters of Obama who I bet have not lifted a finger for the cause of civil rights in this country!

Like so many in the media, until Donna Brazile and Rep. Clyburn brought it up, you chose to ignore it.

There are plenty of us, on Black radio, Black talk radio, in the Black Blogosphere, who have been bringing this up.

We brought it up, after it became obvious that it was a PATTERN.

The disingenousness of the 'media' to connect the dots is what has disgusted some of us out here.

These are not 'Isolated Incidents'.

They are neither ISOLATED nor INCIDENTAL.

They begin with Sheehan.
Then his false apology; Clinton's fake apology - fake, why? Because PENN was on Hardball shuffling the same swill not an hour after the debate.

Then there were the THREE Iowa organizers that had to resign because of the Madrassa LIE.

Then came the Bob Kerrey endorsement of Clinton and his 'it's great Obama can relate to the Black Youth/Islamic Manchurian Candidate/Secular Madrassa' SMEAR...followed by oops, an apology.

Then came the Charlie Rose interview, which dripped with 'Who-Does-This-Negro-Think-He-Is?'

Then
The MLK insult....which supposedly The Community ' Misunderstood'.

The Mandela insult....which supposedly The Community ' Misunderstood'.

Hillary - the Country going ' backwards' by electing Obama

Then, we have the comments by Donna Brazile:
For him to go after Obama using "fairy tale," calling him a "kid," as he did last week, it's an insult. And I tell you, as an African-American, I find his words and his tone to be very depressing.


BOTH Clyburn & Brazille are from the SOUTH - they know what KID means when referencing a Black Man...it's first cousin to BOY- and I assume, even with all your deliberate cluelessness, you get why THAT is offensive.

Then, we have the Cuomo ' Shuck and Jive' - yet another ' misinterpretation' of the English Language.

And finally, we have today's ' Isolated Incident' from The Guardian:

In the words of that Clinton adviser: "If you have a social need, you're with Hillary. If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend and you're young and you have no social needs, then he's cool."

But, of course, I know....tomorrow, the Clintons will explain how THIS TOO, was ' misinterpreted'.

Funny how many times the ENGLISH LANGUAGE has to be ' reinterpreted' and 'explained' to folks for whom English IS THEIR FIRST LANGUAGE.

I will say it again:


When 'Isolated Incidents' are neither

ISOLATED

nor

INCIDENTAL..

They form a PATTERN.

You either choose to accept what the PATTERN tells you and go on accordingly.

It's 'Dogwhistle' politics, and Black folk understand the call of that whistle better than anyone..

Because our SURVIVAL in America depends on it.

But, it's ok. I know. It's all in my ' imagination'.

Uh huh.

So I didn't gather from reading that the Obama campaign was raising the issue but rather it's others who are still fully dedicated to identity politics. Is that right? Of course it would be stupid for Obama to bring it up. Obama right avoids highlighting the race issue reckoning correctly that it would be a mistake. When other are carrying a useful storyline for you, and that is being done, the first rule is not to step on the story. And while others get all in a huff over this or that perceived slight, Obama has the opportunity to stand above it. He is an awfully good candidate.

It's sad that the Obama campaign has to be linked to this story: this is all happening because of a pattern of Clinton surrogates and culminating in the Clinton's themselves making racially insenstive statements. Similar gender-biased statements have not come out of the Obama campaign to my knowledge. Yet they are forced to be lumped into this fight and take it on? Distracting from Sen. Obama's own message of unity and change in politics.

Frankly, the bigger problem in the fairy tale remark Marc was that he LIED about Sen. Obama's opposition to the war. He completely distorted Sen. Obama's comments and the sheer mendacity of his statements and the lack of rebuttal by the media to say, hey, that is NOT what Sen. Obama said is striking.

Similarly, while Ben Smith at politico has a good recap of what is angering many African Americans as well as the current quote (Barack Obama being the hip young black guy if you don't have problems you should elect) it neglects to illustrate how this race baiting HURTS the Obama campaign and makes the implicit case that it helps.

We have deep racial and gender issues in this country that are slowly being exposed by this campaign; but I do not believe we can have this discussion in a political crucible. It just divides the nation deeper.

I don't know why you sound so shocked about the Clintons, Marc, because no one is saying they are racist. Simply that a pattern of racially charged codes has emerged from that campaign from the top to the bottom, surrogates and themseleves and it is making people in the African American community stop and wonder what the hell is going on.

One time, fine explain away. But now, there is a whole list that coils around the campaign from volunteers, to staff, to close advisors, to surrogates, to the Clintons themselves. And to ignore the pain that generates is to ignore a fundamental truth. Just as it is to ignore that Sen. Clinton being a woman and her emotional momment is conveyed as a weakness and her crying and losing control rather than feeling emotion. And it stems from her gender.

A young, hip, black man. That was what the quote from the Guardian said today. A man Sen. Clinton called naive for holding her own view earlier in the summer. If a man had called Sen. Clinton a naive young thing - hell - I can not imagine the out cry.

You posted something thoughtful, but it just highlights the coded divide that is in this country. And it exists not simply along race: Jews, Muslims, Women, Latinos. We are a nation divided historically but there is a truth in what Sen. Obama says; what connects us remains stronger. I hope in the course of this discussion as it moves forward this remains true. That we have changed that much.

This is all so transparent.

Obama has had his surrogates, starting with campaign spokesman Eugene Robinson, playing the race card since Tuesday night blaming those awful racist voters in New Hampshire for their loss.

Yesterday, the Obama campaign trots out Jesse, Jr. to ask why Clinton didn't cry over Hurricane Katrina.

And, today, the incredibly hypocritical Donna Brazille e-mails juicy questions about the Clinton's pattern of racism to Ben Smith at Politico before leaving her day job as an Obama hack to go over to CNN and decry the injection of race into the contest.

I hope Obama keeps playing the race card as hard as his team has been playing it. What's next? Get Robert Gibbs to do one of his famous YouTube ads...you know, like the Howard Dean/Osama ad only showing Hillary and Bill morphing into KKK hoods?

So much for Mr. Kumbaya.

The Clintons are going to do whatever they can to win. After all, Hillary did say she's in it to win it. The remarks that the Clinton camp are making shows how these people will not change America-- they will just continue on down their merry way of dividing the electorate.

Marc,
Who puts race and gender in this campaign? The Clintons? The Press? Or everyone.
When Tim Russert asked Obama about those who feel he lacks the experience, that his resume is thin, and why not wait Obama talks not about his qualifications, not about what the job requires: rather he quotes King and says that the urgency of now demands he run. King was talking about the civil rights movement and obama is talking about himself. And he uses king to not answer the question, to avoid a huge concern.
And who else can quote king but him?
Yes his racial identity is tricky for his staff to talk about but so is Hillary's being female difficult for her campaign to talk about. This aspect of each is an asset that is difficult to discuss for each.
His campaign has yet to show him with a group of Black people or a group of any minorites. We know he is friends with Deval Patrick and that Deval patrick supports him but we didnot see pictures of them together in NH. His campaign quotes King but avoids pictures of black folks. His campaign seems to love press about his father's family and I see his father's face and relatives faces but I do not see pictures of his mother or his mother's parents who raised him in his teenage years and got him into a private school in Hi. I hear about how authentic his 4 years in Indoneysia make him but I don't see pictures of him and his mom and his step father there. And as he tries to win over black america in S.C. I bet we do not start seeing those pictures now.
Its so true that Barack is this amazing window on a changing america, that he's not just this and not just that, and its absolutely true that like Tiger Woods, America seems ready to embrace him, but it is complicated and Obama's campaign seems to control the imagery more than any other candidate, that we are being massaged and even manipulated and marketed by his campaign.
Comparing king, kennedy and johnson became very apt because so many people started comparing Obama to a young jack kennedy and he and michelle as having the excitement of jack and jackie, and because obama and many others focused so intently on his king-like ability to speak. Obama and his campaign invite those comparisons constantly. That she works while others talk is true of her and her message and while it was a difficult point to make the Obama people walked into it, it rings true to a lot of us, it stung them a great deal, and it is not a racist construction. It was more akin to lloyd benson's rejoinder back to the indiana senator who tried to link his looks and his youth to jack kennedy. The older uglier and more wrinkled candidate are wise to exploit these moments.
Cuomo's quote was about all candidates performing in the expected dance in front of the media: performing to expectations.
The guardian quote is just a dopey competitive quote from a campaign worker talking to a british reporter an ocean away. It's fair to assume it was off the record, that it was said informally, that it wasn't an organized part of the campaign's intended message. And it is fairly certain that Obama campaign workers said dopey crap about hillary's wobbly near-tear moment last week and that such a slight wasn't news because its okay to bash women for crying and bash women voters for responding to it but its not okay to make fun of young flighty college aged liberals who are anxious to vote for barack but probably don't ever socialize with black folks. But lets remember these are both sociologically interesting phenomenas and merit some observation.
Race and gender and age and social status continue to be interesting aspects of candiates, campaigns and voters and we shouldn't be surprised that it gets talked in all kinds of ways.

These Clinton supporters in here disgust me just as much as Bill and Hillary. bell hooks said be wary of the white libeal. This disgusting pattern of events and the response by many liberal whites has finally made me understand what bell meant.

The Clintons have accused him of having dealt drugs. Their campaign workers were twice caught spreading the madrassa lie about Obama. On and on and on up until this very day. Now he's not presidential material, but an "imaginary black friend" who's cool! It's disgusting and their response was disgusting.

I'm pissed that those radio show hosts fell into the "fairy tale" trap and didn't get down to the nitty gritty. The "fairy tale" comment was the least offensive of them all. But it's what's made the news and now white people are going to try to turn this around on Obama, an honorable man having to walk a tight rope because some whites still can't honestly confront race. He's doing a hell of a job and I support that man 100%. He's complete class and dignity! Bill isn't half the man he is and he knows it.

That said, the one encouraging thing was that after all three of Bill's interviews on black radio, I heard not one caller say they were satisfied with his explaination. Not one. They all said it was just spin and they remain disappointed and no longer trust the Clintons.

I am young so I don't feel any kind of loyalty to the Clintons. But as horrible as all of this has been for our community, it's almost healthy, because the reverence we had for the Clintons was completely UNHEALTHY. We were a bunch of loyal lap dogs and that is a pathetic position to be in. And this is what allowed Bill and Hillary to be so bold, because they actually believed we'd side with them. That we'd let it slide and turn the other cheek because we loved them as much as we love Jesus. Well, it's not working out that way. And especially not with blacks under 30, who've never been enamored with Bill and Hillary because were children when he was elected.

But what they're doing to Obama makes my blood boil. The way they've taken advantage of the real love the black community felt for them disgusts me. I am heartbroken for Obama because he is just the epitome of what a black man in this country can do if he is given the opportunity and works his butt off. He's what every little black boy should aspire to be. And to have him slandered and belittled by two corrupt,entitled, and morally bankrupt trolls like the Clintons just burns me up!!! No matter how hard you try, no matter how brilliant you are, no matter how sucessful you are, you're still just a "boy". Oh, wait, I mean "kid".But he is strong and I believe he will come out on top.

The Clintons have ruined their relationship with the black community. They know it and that's why they were on damage control today.

I hope all decent hearted people come out and send a signal to Bill and HIll. Vote against her. This country deserves better.

@ Michael: And who else can quote king but him?

Um, John Edwards did, extensively at the start of his campaign.

Michael,

What are you even talking about? Take your ass back to stormfront, hatemonger.

A previous posting by RKA explains this extensively. Whatever the rationale for the Clintons' maneuver, the Obama camp should avoid falling in the trap of making this a big deal. Obama cannot afford making race central to his endeavor, it would be the end of it. Obama's appeal is in his promise to make us understand that far more unites than divides us. Obama's promise is to focus on solving this country's problems and heal the world by appealing to the decency he finds in all humans irrespective of race, gender, ideology or geography. We should leave tribal wars to others to wage and focus on making Obama's dream a concrete and practical reality.

Kelley, you are not making much sense! Are you saying that any criticism of Obama by a white person is racist? Seriously, we should all unquestioningly take him at his word? I saw the video of Bill Clinton talking about Obama and Iraq war. It was very clear that he was talking about Obama's politics of the Iraq war.

When did the Clintons accuse him of dealing drugs?
When they found out about those workers they asked them to leave. When Billy Shaheen said those stupid things he was asked to resign.

The Obama campaign put out a memo insinuating Hillary being too close the Indian American community? Should we infer, therefore, that Obama is racist towards Indians? I don't think so. Did he fire his campaign workers who wrote that memo? Why did Obama share a stage with that odious anti-gay bigot McClurkin? Did you express the same outrage at that time against Obama? Did he ever apologize for that behavior?

I think you are engaging in slander and a bit of exaggerated outrage to push your candidate. You are just playing politics!

The Clintons are users--they use women, they use tainted money, and they misuse the language to the point of devaluing speech as a social currency (how old were you when you learned the meaning of is?) They are long-time partners in trying to destroy working-class women who complain about having been victims of Bill's predatory tendencies.

And now our purported "first black president" and his wife are accused once again of playing the race card to win an election.

Paul Cowan, a SNCC volunteer, noted many years after he had left Mississippi that "there is a kind of Jesus Christ complex that many middle-class whites bring to their relations with people whom they consider oppressed." (See John Dittmer's, Local People: The Struggle for Civil Rights in Mississippi, p. 263)

What better description of the self-centered and self-serving posture of a couple whose "triangulations" (a political term, not trysts) include candidate Bill's Sister Souljah moment (where he deliberately twisted the entertainer's words in order to diss Jesse Jackson) and his flying home to Arkansas for the lethal injection of Ricky Ray Rector, a mentally handicapped black death row inmate, to spotlight his "toughness" in backing of executions. (Rector's brain was so addled that before going to the execution chamber that he saved the dessert from his last meal "for later.")

Compared to these earlier transgressions, the Clintons' rewriting of civil rights history might seem to some as lesser sins.

But they do bring to mind Cowan's remarks and underscore the Clintons' tendency to be willing to belong to a righteous coalition ... when they can lead it. The price they extract is homage, the sister of entitlement.

And their remarks not only dishonor Martin Luther King and a host of other black martyrs in the cause of human rights, but also the memories of Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman, Viola Liuzzo and many other whites who actually risked something in the same cause.

Add all of this to Hillary's flip-flopping on the issue of torture (see www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Hillary_and_torture_audio_version.html) and to some rightwing radio commentators hints that the practice might not be all that bad if practiced in the United States and you have a troubling panorama indeed.


Martin Edwin Andersen
Churchton, Maryland

Who really did not see race coming to a head in this election?

I am just surprised that the Clintons are surprised by it.

What is going on here? The Clinton campaign is accused of "racial insensitivity." Sorry, I don't see that at all. What I do see is Obama supporters taking statements out of context, taking perfectly appropriate criticisms and distorting their meaning and proclaiming that this kind of criticism is somehow racist. I was especially disgusted by Donna Brazile's little tirade. This is either a calculated attack on the Clintons to drive a wedge between them and African-American Democrats, or a super-sensitive, paranoid reaction accusing the Clinton campaign of using "code words" to appeal to racists. This is a real tragedy. It's not the Clintons but the Obama supporters who have injected racism into this campaign. What a vicious, undeserved attack on the Clintons. This is the way to destroy the Democratic party. A lot of people owe the Clintons an apology, but I won't hold my breath waiting to hear it happen. This whole exercise is so self-defeating. To shout racism where it doesn't exist can be enough to turn non-black voters away from Obama, because they will identify with the Clintons for being falsely accused. Is this what we can expect for the rest of the Primary season?

Loving the Clintons doesn't make a person a hater.
There's no stormfront to get back to.
Obama can say that Hillary is for the war a thousand times (and has) but that doesn't make her for the war. She voted to give a president the power to go in and talk about going in so that the president could continue foriegn policy.
The idea back then was that it was the kind of power and unity a president needs at a precarious moment in human history to add weight to negotiations and demands about inspectors and whatall. All the simple minded reactionaries in the world can change what that vote was at the time but that doesn't make it a vote for war. She knew that a president ought to have the backing and room to wiggle a sword without declaring war. She knew that Bill would've needed that kind of unity vote and backing by the majority of both parties in such a moment and she held her nose and voted that way for Bush. In that way hillary's 'war resolution' vote was sane and principalled and legitimate and not poll-driven. I am anti-war and a pacifist and a lefty and I get that. I don't trust bush or his daddy or his people or his grandaddy but it was still probably the right vote to make because if Hillary or Obama were president then or now, I would want the two parties and two houses of congress to give the president enough room to rattle a sword here and there: presidents throughout our history have had to do this.
Many times I oppose the decision the president makes or thier timing and yet on the whole its been important for them to be able to do so.
A very sad truth is that bush abused this bit of leash congress gave him to conduct foriegn policy but Hillary's vote was a principalled one.
And obama pretending otherwise is a lie. ampifying an oversimplification is a lie.
That Obama tries to raise money on this vote of Hillary's by misrepresenting it is slimy and beneath him.
The other lie that Obama runs on is that being Hillary in the first lady role for eight years means nothing, adds nothing, doesn't count. Jokes by comedians that thier wives wouldn't get the laughs and that no one wants a pilot's wife to fly the plane don't capture any real truth here. Hillary's role in the white house is clear from all the books about Bill's presidency and from her poll ratings and book sales and her fund raising for every democrat in the country these past 16 years.
It was easier for Obama to oppose the vote because it didn't mean anything to him, he bore no responsibility for his position because he didn't have to make the vote: he was still just a state pol. He wasn't part of the institution that was being asked to do the right thing.
I will have an easy time supporting Obama if Hillary loses but I will not think he is ready.
Nor do I think the bill I voted for 16 years ago would be ready for the different world we have now. He too would have been a big risk and perhaps too big a risk.
I don't work for her campaign or give money to her campaign but after 16 years of watching her operate on the world stage I do think she is ready, that she is our Eleanor.

Two points for Marc:

1. This campaign has been going on for months. All summer and fall, there was not a single possibly racist comment from the Clinton campaign. A few weeks ago, she announced that she would begin attacking, calling it the "fun part" of the campaign. Since then, we've had two or three campaign volunteers in Iowa forwarding the "Obama is a secret Muslim e-mail," Shaheen asking whether Obama had sold drugs and Penn repeating "cocaine" on national TV, Bob Kerrey with his "Barack ___ Obama with his muslim father and madrassah education" comments, Hillary's MLK/LBJ comments, Bill's "fairy tale" comments, Cuomo's comments, and the anonymous quote from the Clinton advisor about Obama being the cool imaginary black friend. Odd how there were no such comments prior to a few weeks ago (when Hillary announced she's start going negative), and there have been so many such comments since. Is there a credible explanation?

2. This is a multi-candidate campaign, with several candidates competing against each other. Odd how not a single ambiguously racist comment has come from any campaign other than Hillary's (other than Biden's obviously clumsy "clean and articulate" line). Edwards, for example, has attacked Obama on various issues. Why haven't we heard any possibly racist language from his camp? Is messaging just better from the other campaigns than it is from Hillary's?

In turn, the Clinton campaign has accused the Obama campaign of artificially ginning up the controversy.

With good reason. Whose campaign, after all, serves to immediately gain from any controversy surrounding race? Obama's, that whose. I mean, anything can potentially be viewed through the prism of racial conflict. Giving LBJ a portion of the credit for civil rights legislation is "insensitive?" Give me a friggin break. Obie's campaign better watch their step. They might think they can hoodwink African American voters into thinking the Clintons are racists, but I doubt it'll be successful. And it might just risk a white backlash.

THis is not a path the Obama campaign should go. Criticizing Obama's experience is not racist.

Exactly. If this is they way it's going to be, then I'm said to report that the country frankly isn't ready for its first black president.

And their remarks not only dishonor Martin Luther King and a host of other black martyrs in the cause of human rights...

One of the wackiest things I've read on the internets in a long, long while. There's absolutely no question -- it's a well-documented matter of historical record -- that President Johnson and his mastery of the legislative process were instrumental in getting the landmark 1964 legislation passed. It also took a fair amount of political courage, as he had to face down the ample racists in his own party.

President Clinton's record on equal opportunity:

Building One America. The President has led the nation in an effort to become One America in the 21st Century: a place where we respect others' differences and, at the same time, embrace the common values that unite us. Dr. John Hope Franklin, Advisory Board Chair, and Rev. Suzan Johnson Cook served on the Advisory Board to the President's Initiative on Race, which the President charged with overseeing this effort. The President, the Administration and the Advisory Board were actively involved in public outreach efforts -- including holding numerous public meetings and town halls -- to engage Americans across the nation in this historic effort. One of the critical elements of the President's Initiative on Race was identifying, highlighting and sharing with the nation promising practices -- local and national efforts to promote racial reconciliation. The Advisory Board presented their final report to the President on September 18, 1998, and recommended that conversations on race continue.

Creating an Administration that Looks Like One America. The President appointed the most diverse Cabinet and Administration in history. The Clinton Cabinet includes three African Americans: Rodney Slater, Secretary of the Department of Transportation; Togo West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Alexis Herman, Secretary of Labor. Additionally, African Americans serve in the Administration as Surgeon General, Deputy Attorney General for the Department of Justice, Director of the National Park Service, Deputy Secretary of Commerce, Department of Education General Counsel and as the Department of Education's Chief of Staff.

Thirteen percent of Clinton Administration appointees are African American, which is twice as many African Americans as any previous administration.

White House appointees include: Bob Nash, Assistant to the President and Director of Presidential Personnel; Thurgood Marshall, Jr., Assistant to the President and Director of Cabinet Affairs; Minyon Moore, Assistant to the President and Director of Political Affairs; Cheryl Mills, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel and Ben Johnson, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Public Liaison; Alphonso (Al) Maldon, Deputy Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs; and Tracey Thornton, Deputy Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs.

Increasing the Number of Judicial Appointments. President Clinton has named 14 African Americans as U.S. Attorneys and 12 African Americans as U.S. Marshals. The President has nominated 57 African Americans to the Federal bench, 16 percent of his total Federal bench nominations.

Ordered an Assessment of Affirmative Action Programs. The President ordered a comprehensive review of the government's affirmative action programs which concluded that affirmative action is still an effective and important tool to expand educational and economic opportunity to all Americans. This review of federal affirmative action programs has helped to ensure that these programs are fair and effective and that they can survive legal challenges. As a result, programs that benefit African Americans, including students, working men and women, and business owners, remain in effect andare more likely to be upheld by the courts.

Reducing Backlog and Expanding Alternative Dispute Resolution at Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The FY99 budget included $279 million -- a $37 million increase over the previous year -- to significantly expand EEOC's alternative dispute resolution program and reduce the backlog of private sector discrimination complaints. The final budget fully funds the President's request -- providing the first real increase for EEOC in several years.

Creating a National Memorial to Honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In July of 1998, President Clinton signed a new measure authorizing the creation of a national monument to Dr. King on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

Opposed California Prop. 209 and Similar Measures. The Clinton Administration strongly opposes state and local initiatives to eliminate affirmative action programs that expand opportunities for African Americans and others. The Administration opposed Proposition 209 in California and filed amicus briefs opposing Prop. 209, which currently prohibits state affirmative action programs. The Clinton Administration opposed a similar initiative in Houston, which was defeated and opposed an initiative in Washington that is similar to Prop. 209. In all these cases, representatives of the administration have spoken out strongly against these initiatives as unfair and a barrier to equality.

Ensuring Election Fairness. The Clinton Administration defended racially fair redistricting plans against claims that they were unconstitutional and prevented election day discrimination against minority voters and voter intimidation and harassment by monitoring polling place activities in a record number of states and counties.

Increasing Voter Registration. During 1995 and 1996, the National Voter Registration Act or "Motor Voter" law registered nearly 14 million new voters and made voting easier for millions more. Notably, 1996 saw the highest percentage of voter registration since 1960. [FEC, 6/97]

Working for Fair Housing. To respond to the increase in reported cases of serious fair housing violations, HUD will double the number of its civil rights enforcement actions by the year 2000. HUD has also committed $15 million to 67 fair housing centers around the country to assist in fighting housing discrimination. In addition, the President proposed and won a major expansion of HUD's Fair Housing programs. The FY99 budget expands HUD's Fair Housing programs from $30 million in FY98 to $40 million in FY99. That 33-percent increase includes $7.5 million for a new audit-based enforcement initiative proposed by the Administration.

Working to Ensure Fairness and Remove Barriers to High Quality Education. The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education is working to eliminate discriminatory educational practices within schools that contribute to deficiencies in minority student achievement. These priorities included the inappropriate placement of minority students in special education, limited access of minority students to challenging curricula and programs such as gifted and honors classes and the lack of comparable resources.

Defended Fairness. The Clinton Administration has filed more cases between 1993 and 1997 to enforce fair housing laws than any other Administration (more than 500 cases). For instance, this Administration desegregated a Vidor, Texas, public housing complex and ordered a Mississippi bankto implement remedial lending plans for minority customers who were unfairly denied loans by the bank.

Eliminated Discriminatory "Redlining" Practices. The Clinton Administration negotiated agreements with health care agencies to eliminate discriminatory "redlining" practices denying home health care services based on residential location.

Apologized to the Victims of Tuskegee. President Clinton apologized to the victims of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment and their families, and directed Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala to issue a report about how best to involve communities, especially minority communities, in research and health care. HHS awarded a planning grant to Tuskegee University to help it establish a center for bioethics in research and health care.

Working to Ensure a Fair and Accurate Census. The Clinton Administration is working to ensure that Census 2000 is the most accurate census possible using the best, most up-to-date scientific methods as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences. According to the Census Bureau, the 1990 Census missed 8.4 million people and double-counted 4.4 million others. Nationally, 4.4 percent of African Americans were not counted in the 1990 census. While missing or miscounting so many people is a problem, the fact that certain groups -- such as children, the poor, people of color, city dwellers and people who live in rural rental homes -- were missed more often than others made the undercount even more inaccurate. A fair and accurate Census is a fundamental part of a representative democracy and is the basis for providing equality under the law. The President is determined to have a fair and full count in 2000.

http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/ac199.html

What has Obama done for civil rights and to enhance equal opportunity?

Some facts please!

What has Obama done for civil rights and to enhance equal opportunity?

Some facts please!

Long Time Democrat:
You are wrong. The Decider actually has more minorities in his administration(of course that doesn't equate to competence ie: Alberto Gonzales).

Barack Obama's Record

On Obama's civil rights record, from:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/

Record of Advocacy: Obama has worked to promote civil rights and fairness in the criminal justice system throughout his career. As a community organizer, Obama helped 150,000 African Americans register to vote. As a civil rights lawyer, Obama litigated employment discrimination, housing discrimination, and voting rights cases. As a State Senator, Obama passed one of the country's first racial profiling law and helped reform a broken death penalty system. And in the U.S. Senate, Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.

Ask yourself who stands to gain the most from this dialogue? Then perhaps you will have the answer to who started this debate, intended or perhaps "misunderstood." I agree, as Bill said, "give me a break." I'm just glad that I see the light! Unity works for me any day, even if it is only Hope.

Obama's Plan:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/

The Problem

Pay Inequity Continues: For every $1.00 earned by a man, the average woman receives only 77 cents, while African American women only get 67 cents and Latinas receive only 57 cents.

Hate Crimes on the Rise: The number of hate crimes increased nearly 8 percent to 7,700 incidents in 2006.

Efforts Continue to Suppress the Vote: A recent study discovered numerous organized efforts to intimidate, mislead and suppress minority voters.

Disparities Continue to Plague Criminal Justice System: African Americans and Hispanics are more than twice as likely as whites to be searched, arrested, or subdued with force when stopped by police. Disparities in drug sentencing laws, like the differential treatment of crack as opposed to powder cocaine, are unfair.
Barack Obama's Plan
Strengthen Civil Rights Enforcement

Obama will reverse the politicization that has occurred in the Bush Administration's Department of Justice. He will put an end to the ideological litmus tests used to fill positions within the Civil Rights Division.
Combat Employment Discrimination

Obama will work to overturn the Supreme Court's recent ruling that curtails racial minorities' and women's ability to challenge pay discrimination. Obama will also pass the Fair Pay Act to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work.
Expand Hate Crimes Statutes

Obama will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal Section.
End Deceptive Voting Practices

Obama will sign into law his legislation that establishes harsh penalties for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote.
End Racial Profiling

Obama will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.
Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support

Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.
Eliminate Sentencing Disparities

Obama believes the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.
Expand Use of Drug Courts

Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

If the Clinton campaign is percieved as resorting to race-baiting in South Carolina, they're super-duper-dead-in-the-water. And rightfully so, if they're a deliberate strategy to raise any questions whatsoever about Obama and race. But -- really -- the Clintons?

Why do the Clintons get a pass on all things race? Here's Joe Lieberman a day or so after Bill Clinton went to Connecticut to stump for him. Lieberman: "Ned Lamont can have Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton," Liebermen said. "I'm proud to have had Bill Clinton, Senator Dodd, Senator Inouye, Senator Salazar and a lot of other great Democrats." It was an accident that all the black supporters where clustered on one side of that equation? At the same time Lieberman was saying this, he was circulating fliers in the black community implying LAMONT was a racist.

Bill Clinton a few weeks later on Lieberman/Lamont: "I don't have the same view of this as some people do. My view is Connecticut is an unmitigated blessing for the Democrats because Lieberman has said if he wins he's going to vote with us to organize the Senate."

Doesn't "unmitigated blessing" endorse Lieberman's ugly racial politics?

I'm not saying that the Clintons are racist, they're not, it's a ridiculous claim. What I am saying and many people are saying is that the Clintons are not above using the issue of race to win a political battle. That's not the same thing.

Personally, the Clintons are not racist. Politically, they're cut throat and would do anything to win to the point of being amoral. Both statements are true and one does not excuse or explain the other. Much psychoanalyzing was done of Bill Clinton's "compartmentalizing" the various parts of his life to explain how he could do something so stupid with the Lewinsky affair yet be so capable in other matters. I see a similar dynamic in this political campaign - a "compartmentalizing" of the personal beliefs of the Clintons, and in another less public, less discussed, but all too real box -- the ugly tool of racial politics that have existed in this country for more than 200 years.

If you want to see a great Hollywood dramatization of the Clintons 1992 campaign (and its many sub-plots) and what they are capable of and the damage they do to people and how they throw people away they no longer need, check out John Travolta as Bill and Emma Thompson as Hill in "Primary Colors" (1998). I don't think the movie was a big box office smash, but it did well. I saw it when it came out a few years ago. Travolta and Thompson nail it. Great movie and supporting cast. Billy Bob Thornton as the James Carville character. Adrian Lester as the George Stephanopoulos character. And Kathy Bates as the Vince Foster character. Priceless performances! The Clintons will do anything to get back into the White House.

Personally, I don't find anything racist about their remarks. Bill Clinton was only stating that Barack stance on the Irag war was a fairy tale, and the free ride he has been getting from the media as if he was this angel that descended from heaven and can do no wrong, while they, the media and pundits, bash and humilate Hillary. I guess it was easier for the media and pundits to critize a white female than an African-American. As for Hillary's comment she was only stating the fact that it was LBJ who passed the the Civil Rights Act that MLK had fought for. I don't get why it makes it okay for African-American's to make fun of other ethnic groups, but heaven-for-bid you critize them you are labeled as a racist, and everything is blown out of proportion. This is such double standard, and hypocritical. You should be ashame to judge so quickly. You need to calm down and realized the good that Bill and Hillary has done for the African-American community when they were in the White House. Maybe you owe them that much instead of critizing them because of their remarks that was taken out of context.

As the saying goes....payback is a bitch.
You live by the PC sword - you get cut by it on occassion as well. This is priceless. I'm loving it. The left feeding upon itself.

And can someone please tell me what it is that the Clintons did that is so exceptional for blacks? I keep reading quotes like "given all they've done for human rights and/or the black community". WHAT DID THEY DO??? Please provide details.

Bush has had far more blacks (and other rminorities) in his admin - and in far superior positions - than Bill Clinton did. He also committed far more money to AIDS in Africa. Not saying Bush is the end all and be all for the black community - but Clinton wasn't either.

First black President? lmao. How do people convince themselves of such utter nonsense?

This is now a lose-lose for Obama. If he's smart (and I believe he is), he will come out asap and shut this down. Take the high road - which is the bullsh*t he's peddling (and I just love how people are falling for it).

Obama is every bit the cynical politican that the Clintons are. He's just selling a better brand of snake oil - that's all. Nice to see all these idealistic believers. Bill Clinton was absolutely correct - pure fantasy. Perfect for libs. They love make-believe.

Expect the two campaigns to make pretend kissy-kissy in the coming days. So predictable.

Democrats complaining about a minority candidate playing the race card.

You can't write this stuff, really.

Does this mean the Clintons' Official Black Status has been revoked?

Bill's fairy tale thing wasn't racist, it was just stupid and dishonest. He's been pounding that same drum for quite awhile, in an effort to make Hillary's war vote ok, which even if it were true wouldn't make Hillary's war vote OK. And Bill knows it's not true because Obama has explained this ONE comment again and again, and hell, it was obvious to me when he said it in 2004, that oh, he HAS to say that to be nice to Kerry, the nominee. I mean he said it as nice as he could, but he never said that he, Obama, supported the war, ever. It's the stupidest attempt at a gotcha I've seen this entire campaign, and I'm amazed Bill can puff his wheezy chest up to pretend to be indignant about it each time. Well, no I'm not amazed, because I've taken acting. You take the emotion from somewhere else if you can't believe the lie. He's taking it from his true indignation that someone is denying Hillary - and him - their due. And man is he angry.

And the MLK thing wasn't exactly intentionally racist, just - again - mindblowingly stupid. Her defenders keep saying that yes, LBJ did a politically courageous thing, faced down racists in his party, etc. And lovely, but nobody's attacking LBJ here.

Hillary essentially trivialized MLK at LBJ's expense, saying Mr. Inspirational isn't the one who signed the law, let's remember the president did that! First, Mr. Inspirational, MLK, - and a ton of other incredibly brave, non-famous people - created the movement without which there would be no law. And no dis to LBJ again, but they faced down hoses and dogs and guns and went to jail. And some got killed. Second, why is she the LBJ here? Obama can inspire people AND be the president who signs laws, right? Her comment makes no sense except in light of her persistent vision of herself as the only possible boss, that famous sense of entitlement she has. It's patronizing as hell. And white woman's sense of entitlement + patronizing to black guy = well, people are going to see it as racist even if you don't think it is. Even if she didn't think it was. But it was stupid and offensive even without any racism at all.

"I'm Hillary Clinton and I approved this racial slur"

Obama is being scummy and so are his advocates. They are twisting words trying to score some quick points in SC, a state Obama must win.

It is sleazy and sad.

The Clintons spoke at Mrs. King's funeral. They have stood up to the Republicans for the last 20 years as the GOP as tried to reverse civil rights and voting rights.

Obama and surrogates should be ashamed.

Obama is a fraud. He doesn't care about you or me, whites or blacks. He is white when it suits him, bi-racial when it suits him, and he is black when it suits him. He only cares about himself and his political career.

Obama should stop and think for a minute. He lost by 11% among registered Democrats to Clinton in NH. If he keeps suggesting the Clintons are racist he will lost registered Democrats by 20% going forward.

People need to stop being so dumb and getting played by Obama.

Clinton wants to win SC. Why would she insult black people? Why would she race bait? That wouldn't help in SC.

Obama is simply being a Chicago pol playing ever card in his deck ... incl the race card.

Great point, Dickie Head. Why would the Clintons and their surrogates do this?

Could it be that they're Machiavellian assholes who can always claim to be "misunderstood"?

Bottom line, dude, is a pattern is a pattern.

Speaking of patterns, how about Hillary's sisterhood pattern of playing the pathetic game of identity politics? Isn't she blatantly the gender card? Maybe that appeals to ball-less castratos like you.

"Im Hillary Clinton and I approved this racial slur"

I would just like to ad that the Clintons have been particularly brilliant in how they have played the race care. It usually follows a pattern.

1) Step 1: have a surrogate say something racially insensitive but nothing over the top (i.e. no Keith Richards/Kramer moments, of course...it has to be subtle, it has to be in plausibly deniable "code."

2) Let it hang out there for a day or so and spread under the radar.

3) Once the story is starting to die, remind voters of it yet again by half-apologizing or kind of backtracking so that the racial comments get abother newscyle

4) Play a great game of spin in the "apology" which sends the message to the casual white or hispanic voter that this is "once, again, the blacks getting worked up over nothing and demanding special favors."

You saw that yesterday, Why did bill Clinton go on Al Sharpton's radio show? It was a tactically brillinat manuver to get Brack Obama and Al Sharption in the same news story and thus subtly linked in the minds of your average, relatively unsophisticated voter who does not take the time to hear Obama's full inclusive speeches, but has just now read an AP article in their local paper mentioning both Sharpton and Obama and she or she is thinking to himself, "When I get behind that curtain, there is no way that I am voting for that guy." It was also brillinat that the whole discussion is over the least offensive of all the clinton smears - the fairy tale comment. The media is structuring this story to play into the "blacks getting upset over nothing" voters.

The Clintons got really worried because the voters and media had stopped looking at Obama as black. Their manuvers - subtle or not - are a way of reminding voters, "Hey, don't forget - he's one of those people."

They are tactically brilliant and they play the media and the public for fools. Somewhere in Hell or Pergatory, Richard Nixon is smiling today. "At last! I have a true heir," he must be saying.

Now the Clintons are not dumb, they knew there would be blowback from the black community, but they know that blowback will help them get solidarity with voters they needs and Obama had been making inroads with in Iowa: lower class white democrats.

Furthermore, as this contest moves towards Nevada and Feb 5th, the Clintons know that by ginning up a little racial crucible, they are going to help turn out hispanic voters. Look at what one of Clinton's own pollsters said in buried in the last two paragraphs of Ryan Lizza's latest article:

"On the morning after Clinton’s victory, I talked to Sergio Bendixen, one of her pollsters, who specializes in the Hispanic vote. “In all honesty, the Hispanic vote is extremely important to the Clinton campaign, and the polls have shown—and today is not a great day to cite polls—that even though she was slipping with women in Iowa and blacks in South Carolina, she was not slipping with Hispanics,” he said. “The fire wall doesn’t apply now, because she is in good shape, but before last night the Hispanic vote was going to be the most important part of her fire wall on February 5th.” The implications of that strategy are not necessarily uplifting.

When I asked Bendixen about the source of Clinton’s strength in the Hispanic community, he mentioned her support for health care, and Hispanic voters’ affinity for the Clinton era. “It’s one group where going back to the past really works,” he said. “All you need to say in focus groups is ‘Let’s go back to the nineties.’ ” But he was also frank about the fact that the Clintons, long beloved in the black community, are now dependent on a less edifying political dynamic: “The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."


So the clinton campaign has admitted on the record that part of their electoral strength going forward is hispanic racism against blacks. The clinton people know the demographic changes in this country are favoring Hispanics and so its ok if Blacks are thrown uder the bus at this stage of their political career. Unlike with Sista Soujah, the black polulation did nothing at all to deserve this slap in the face except for start to vote for Obama.

Just as Bill Clinton was proclaimed the "First Black Preisdent" Hillary "chips and guacamole" Clinton is now going to try to be crowned the "First Hispanic president."

The Obama campaign has a real challenge on their hands, You guys strepped up a bit off the doormat yeasterday, but you can't let Hillary change the race into this. If there was ever a time for Obama to be a racial concilliator, the time is now.

As a footnote, there is somebody who could really help a little prevent the coming Hillary strategy to drive a wedge between blacks and white/hispanics: Paging Bill Richardson. I know that you are keeping your options open to be able to serve in either administration, but are you going to sit back on the sidelines and thus condone Hillary's strategy to divide our country racially for her personal political gain? I really hope you and other hispanic leaders speak up against this strategy. HIllary will trhow you undeer the bus when convenient as well. In Iowa she says that undocumented workers merely accused of crimes should be deported with "no legal process." But in Nevada, she says there a are" no illegal women." Don't get seduced by the clintons. Now is the time to stand up for the America that Obama represents or let America be torn apart by the Clintons.

Vote Edwards - He Loves Everybody (though he might love the poor and working class a little bit more)

The Clintons are NOT racists. What they are, are politically savvy. The tactics they have used in this campaign have been purposeful and planned. Every 'mis-statement', like a clever lawyer, puts the seed of doubt in the minds of the jury(voter). Their every move has been torn from the Karl Rove playbook and speaks loudly to the depths they will go to for political power.

One cannot continue to distort and try to appeal to the lowest common denominator and then claim to want to restore this country's ideals. This woman will say and do whatever she thinks will get her to where she wants to go..and that is back to the White House. What other candidate has felt the need to 'repackage' her image so many times in this campaign alone?

Will the real Hillary Clinton stand up... and go home!

I believe it's a pattern and that it's coordinated from the highest levels of the Clinton campaign (by the way add the Guardian quote to the list). I also believe that the question about racism gets answered when one is in a difficult situation. I don't believe the Clintons should get a free pass because of the 1990s (and what was there anyway besides Welfare reform, NAFTA, botched health care, DOMA, etc, that hurt working Americans?).

I believe that they're trying to frame the issue around race for two reasons. In Iowa, Obama succeeded in pegging the Clintons as the candidate of the status quo; he succeeded in essentially saying they were the "spin masters and negative ad peddlers." He was calling for unity, and people bought it. By sowing the oldest seeds of division--race and gender--they can say that he's full of it, and a "false hope."

Second, they want to win Nevada. There is a large Latino population there. There is an unfortunate division between Latinos and African Americans. Playing on stereotypes and fears--the stuff of Karl Rove--re-enforces divisions and gets votes.

Those of us that are sick and tired of this kind of crap can stop it by doing one thing: defeating it. It'll be defeated on door steps and with small donations. I challenge everyone that doesn't like this kind of politics to go volunteer or donate to Barack Obama's campaign. I hope we can end this kind of politics once and for all.

I challenge everyone that doesn't like this kind of politics to go volunteer or donate to Barack Obama's campaign. I hope we can end this kind of politics once and for all.

If you want to "end this kind of politics once and for all" the thing to do is vote for Hillary, and teach Obama he can't play the race card and get away with it.

Iguana...funny how I haven't heard or read Barrack Obama play the race card even once during this campaign, but Hillary, Bill, and there surrogates are amassing a lengthy list of not only playing the race card but the gender card as well. You are truly an uninformed moron. God help us that idiots like you can vote.

I don't think the Clintons are racist, but could we make a distinction between racism and racial insensitivity? The latter could include both intentional and unintentional gaffes. None of us know the internal workings of a campaign, and I'm skeptical of conspiracy in this regard. I hope Obama doesn't go there either, but the Clintons need to avoid stoking it further by displaying any sense of paternalistic entitlement to black support.

By the way, watch Bill Clinton's savaging of Obama again on video and then hear his response to Sharpton, where he tries to say the fairy tale comment was only about Iraq. Vintage Clintonian revisionism at work again?

Bill Clinton is a proven lying sack of shit. Why should this be any different now?

Paddy,

this is the tactical brilliance of the Clinton campaign.

First, you put out stuff that is a little insensitive, but nothing that is not plausibly deniable nor easily fixed with an apology.

Second, you come up with something new every weeks or two tot keep the conversation alive.

Third, when people start to speak up about the "death by a thousand cuts" strategy, turn the tables on them and accuse them of playing the race card.

Look there is a pattern of reasonably hgih level surrogaes doing this dirty work, and not just against Obama. Earlier in the year, both Rangel and Vilsack came out to trash Guilliani on his marriages and infidelity right around the time the christian evalngelicans were gathering for some meeting. Of course, the clinton campaign denie that they had anything to do with that either.

If people really believe that these are all "Accidents" then you have to accept the proposition that the clinton camapign is not in control of its high level surrogates. Do we really think this lack of discipline will serve her well in the general or in the white house.

So take your choice, either Hillary is a nixonian race baiter or she is not in control of her own campaign. Which makes people think she would be the best leader of the free world?

The idea that the Clintons are racist is beyond absurd.

Further, if the Obama campaign continues to cry "racism" every time a compliment (read Biden) or criticism is made of him or his record, he will lose a sizable chunk of his potential white and (especailly!) Hispanic voters.

While I don't doubt Obama's desire to bring people together, I question that the best way to do it is by decrying the battles of the '90's while simultaneously embracing the battles of the '60's.

The entire Democratic campaign for president is a high-stakes balancing act: it could happen that its conduct could render the one who wins unelectable. Obama I believe understands this. I wish the Clintons did. Even if Hillary gets the nomination, if the voters who supported Obama lose interest, the USA could face continued decline.

The good 'fairy tale' would be to pursue this race honorably to discover who can best win in November, and then for the other contestant to, for the good of us all and with the embrace of substantive partnership from the winner, take the vice-presidential role. Such a swallowing of pride in the context of real partnership between the two would ratify the reality of our hopes, guarantee victory, and be a giant first step in regenerating America.

Whichever took the lead, the other could be essential insurance that this dream, unlike others we have begun, does not end with yet another mysterious assasination.

For such a 'big fairy tale' to even be possible, the contest must absolutely eschew making bad blood between the candidates.

Have you Obama Fan Club actually looked at what was said in the Guardian? The "advisor" didn't say Obama was somebody's "cool black friend," he said that was the way Obama's SUPPORTERS perceive him.

To me, very analogous to Bush's SUPPORTERS perception that Bush is "a good guy to have a beer with." And I take that as the point being made.

So what. This brohaha is way overblown, and so is quoting KARL FRIGGING ROVE'S Wall Street Journal comments yesterday as a "Clinton Supporter" calling Obama lazy. Rove is just Ratf**king and getting away with it.

"The idea that the Clintons are racist is beyond absurd.

Further, if the Obama campaign continues to cry "racism" every time a compliment (read Biden) or criticism is made of him or his record, he will lose a sizable chunk of his potential white and (especailly!) Hispanic voters.

Posted by JoeCHI "

JoeCHI,

Really - why is the idea that the Clintons are racist 'beyond absurd'? Have you a special brain machine to look into their minds?

And the Obama campaign is not crying racism - it is every thinking, sensible open minded human being who is. I see the pattern and I am not black!

To you this may be a game...maybe you are a Clinton shill posting from her campaign. But remmeber this, it is not a game - you will suffer as well if Clinton aka Rove politics of divide and rule prevail. It might be you, your sister/brother or child who has to go and fight a unnecessary war because Clinton and her ilk did the political thing, instead of the right thing.

I am an African American and had a negative reaction to the Clinton MLK/LBJ remarks well before the issue became a political hot potato. While some may think that I was offended by the characterization that it was the actions of the great white father (LBJ) versus the awakening of the American spirit (through MLK and thousands awakened) that allowed the Civil Rights Act to come to fruition, I realize that misses the mark. It also misses the mark to think that I view Ms. Clinton as being motivated by race in her remarks.

The Civil Rights Movement took heroes. Johnson was a hero. King was a hero.

My reaction was part this: how dare Ms. Clinton reduce the hero status of King, simultaneously raising the hero status of Johnson in making a political point to attack Obama?

My reaction was more visceral than on point as I applaud Johnson. I don’t think Ms. Clinton intended for me to have that visceral reaction and I don’t think she actually quite understands it. I certainly don’t think she was making a racist commentary even though I admit to having this visceral reaction.

While both King and Johnson were required for the Civil Rights Act to pass, the genesis of the Civil Rights Act was in the Kennedy Administration and in the movement started years before. I have little doubt that Bobby Kennedy would have gotten the job LBJ is credited with achieving done.

Again, I do not believe the statement by Ms. Clinton is racial. I just think it was bound to lead to visceral reaction as it is faulty both historically and factually when trying to make a point.

Her campaign talking point was that words matter but action is required. I agree in principle but the point is lost in the poor example that raises a visceral reaction. In the narrative of her talking points, it came across as an effort to say that if not for Johnson, all of King’s talk was just talk. It disregards the sacrifices of Americans that gave their life in the movement and is insensitive to that American sacrifice as the catalyst of the change.


Words DO Matter

Arguably Kennedy was well on his way to the Civil Rights Act. And historical revisionists that we are inclined to be, we forget that the Civil Rights Act passed before the voting rights act. But the voting rights provisions of the Civil Rights Act were gutted in Congress before ever getting back for Johnson to sign.

Or put into perspective the Civil Rights Act (with voting rights stripped) was passed BEFORE the historically significant and bloody “we shall overcome” march from Selma to Montgomery for voting rights

Now Mr. Johnson initially thought that the voting rights act was not really needed because we had the 15th amendment.

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Technically he was right but the states had used clever devices to get around the law’s obvious (though escaped by literal devices, for you strict constructionists out there) intent.

Johnson recognized that the newly minted Civil Rights Act and the 100 year old 15th amendment were not enough.

“Experience has clearly shown that the existing process of law cannot overcome systematic and ingenious discrimination. No law that we now have on the books-and I have helped to put three of them there--can ensure the right to vote when local officials are determined to deny it.
In such a case our duty must be clear to all of us. The Constitution (15TH amendment) says that no person shall be kept from voting because of his race or his color. We have all sworn an oath before God to support and to defend that Constitution. We must now act in obedience to that oath.” -LBJ to Congress

Again words matter,

Quoting again from the speech Johnson gave introducing the Voting Rights Act right after the Bloody Sunday Selma to Montgomery March.

“There is no Negro problem. There is no Southern problem. There is no Northern problem. There is only an American problem. And we are met here tonight as Americans--not as Democrats or Republicans-we are met here as Americans to solve that problem.”

Obamaesque you might agree. I thought Obama borrowed this in his red state blue state message (though that’s beside the point).

Johnson noted that,

“The last time a President sent a civil rights bill to the Congress it contained a provision to protect voting rights in Federal elections. That civil rights bill was passed after 8 long months of debate. And when that bill came to my desk from the Congress for my signature, the heart of the voting provision had been eliminated.
This time, on this issue, there must be no delay, no hesitation and no compromise with our purpose.
We cannot, we must not, refuse to protect the right of every American to vote in every election that he may desire to participate in. And we ought not and we cannot and we must not wait another 8 months before we get a bill. We have already waited a hundred years and more, and the time for waiting is gone.
So I ask you to join me in working long hours--nights and weekends, if necessary--to pass this bill. And I don't make that request lightly. For from the window where I sit with the problems of our country I recognize that outside this chamber is the outraged conscience of a nation, the grave concern of many nations, and the harsh judgment of history on our acts.
WE SHALL OVERCOME” –LBJ to Congress

Note the fact that Johnson said “WE SHALL OVERCOME” is not a small point to me. It was the rallying cry of the March and of the movement. It mattered. WE Became America, not just the Negro.

My point is that the Clinton message on this point is just flawed and insensitive to many like me. Sure LBJ had to go the next step with the Voting Rights Act. But Clinton’s point addressed the already passed Civil Rights Act as a past tense on having the dream become reality with the Civil Rights Act.

Again the visceral reaction is not warranted by the literal though cynical factualness of her statement. “the dream began becoming a reality with the 1964 Civil rights act” Nor is the fact that Johnson himself embraced the very words of Dr. King in imploring Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act. The problem became one of “hero shifting”. Johnson himself discounted his position as hero in the cause:

“The real hero of this struggle is the American Negro. His actions and protests, his courage to risk safety and even to risk his life, have awakened the conscience of this Nation. His demonstrations have been designed to call attention to injustice, designed to provoke change, designed to stir reform.”

Johnson understood my point at the level where it matters. Clinton seems to miss Johnson’s point and used Johnson to score political points to advance the “experience over talk” talking point. I even like Hillary (or certainly Clintons versus the Republicans on Civil Rigths) but was quite disappointed in the tactic.

I’m rambling perhaps but just to have you understand my visceral reaction as an African American. The reaction is much more about King versus politics --not about Obama.

This discussion is just wrong to say that without Johnson the 100 year old 15th amendment would have never been enforced. The courts would have done it through the Supreme Court as the conscience of the nation awakened by King and the movement would have forced them to.

But the time for the voting rights act had immediately arrived because of King’s Bloody March the day before. The day after the march the act was introduced by Johnson to Congress with the text of his speech imploring.

WE SHALL OVERCOME.

We will.

the clintons are killing the democratic party

Didn't George Bush peddle the same non-specific feel good hallmark card line that Obama and his campaign is positioning itself with: "I am a uniter not a divider"? How did that work out for us as a country?
Calling one campaign machiavellian doesn't make the other campaign less machiavellian does it?
Saying that the Clinton's are Rove-like or poll driven or desperate doesn't mean that Obama doesn't have a team that are ina war room like Carville and George S. and paul Begala, or that Obama doesn't have four or a dozen pollsters on staff focused on internals and testing messages or that the clock doesn't tick down in each state for obama as it does for Clinton or Edwrds or Putin for that matter.
I love listening to Obama sometimes, I read his book, I could deal with him being president but I think Hillary is better suited to the job at this moment in history. I think her skills and her experience and her demeanor are better for the country now.
The bush administration's horrible mess and our mistake of putting him and his team in twice for eight long distructive years create the only urgency of now that I am worried about and Hillary seems the much readier and steadier remedy for what we've done wrong these past eight years.
Bill Clinton went in as a neophyte himself in his first term and Washington ate him for lunch again and again: colin powell and sam nunn served him up
and bill's ship almost sunk. The republicans too taught him a few ugly lessons. What way will starry eyed untested Obama have not to be taught the same kind of lesson? A bruising campaign? ten years in illinois? that stuff didn't keep Bill from making rookie mistakes.
Hillary stands the best chance of starting and fighting these kind of problems in office, especially at the beginning. She was there, Bill's closest confidante in the west wing: that experience is something real.
Bill shilled for kerrry last cycle and again and again pointed out that there are real differences between the right and left in this country so george's and now obama's feel-good can't we all get along shiny pretty unity pony sounds pretty fake again. Fighting for change sounds right to me. Having successfully borrowed Bill's 'man from a place called hope' call-to-arms, Obama still has a 'where's the beef?' problem.

It is a pattern for all white people to speak in ways that are unconsciously racist, especially if they use any sort of slang, or informal talk, or humor. The pervasiveness of white racism, and the way that black humor and tropes cross over into mainstream language, means that most white people say all sorts of things that have racial implications when examined. This is why most white people prefer not to talk about race at all in settings where their language might be scrutinized, or if they do have to speak, speak very cautiously and in the blandest generalities.
We are witnessing a trainwreck that is inevitable, given the fact that an African American is a serious candidate. THe closer we look at the language in use, the more that we will see problems.
The question is: what and who can stop this cycle before it wrecks the Democratic party?

When people talk about HRC's experience (aka Michael), by including the 8 years of Bill's presidency, alarm bells go off in my mind.

It is a slippery slope from a real democracy to dynastic politics as you see in many other parts of the world.

Hillary has taken over the Clinton presidency as her own, those 8 years of experiences are now are part of her resume. So what is next, Chelsea Clinton running because she will have had 16 years experience with mom and dad in the white house followed by Bush kids/brothers etc.

It really bothers me when people say Clinton has more experience and 'where is the beef' with Obama. Obama has been in legislative office longer than Clinton, he passed meaningful legislation like ethics reform.

What has Clinton done in 8 years in the senate. Please someone tell me something meaningful that she was instrumental in getting done...?
Instead, people go back to Bill Clinton's presidency and credit her with the good stuff like a booming economy...what exactly did she do with regard to economic policy...?

The racially charged strategy from Hillary was a winner in New Hampshire. It was helped by Obama's style of stump speech and indifferent debate performance on real issues. But she might have lost it with SC voters. Black Dems don;t appreciate her new tack...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

The closer we look at the language in use, the more that we will see problems.
The question is: what and who can stop this cycle before it wrecks the Democratic party?>>

Tom I doubt this is a Democratic Party train wreck at all. But there also has to be a realization that the train has not yet gotten to the station.

I’ll give you a good example in another African American rising star, Harold Ford. I would submit that Mr. Ford has already abandoned his Presidential aspirations. This is not because the African American lost a Senate bid in Tennessee. It’s because he decided to marry the white woman he loves.

I grant you this is hypothetical but…If you can honestly convince yourself that America is ready for Mr. Ford to run for President as the Democratic nominee with his white wife standing beside him, this issue will indeed be behind us. If you can’t, then you realize that it’s not a train wreck issue it is a reality based issue that simply ignoring will not erase.

That does not prevent Blacks from coming together in the end behind Hillary even if they have their Obama ’08 hopes dashed. It’s probably a good thing South Carolina is early in the process. Fortunately for the citizens there, whether it was King or Johnson or Kennedy or the man in the moon, the African American citizens will get to go to the polls and cast their vote.

The reality is Mr. Ford, in the hypothetical race above, would have to deal with disapproval from Black women is South Carolina. That would pale (pardon any pun) in comparison to the underlying racial divide that would occur on the deeper and national level.

America does not have to be over it. Healing is a process and I for one am proud that Obama has become a part of that healing process whether he prevails in his Presidential nomination bid or not.

Its about Feb. 5th stupid. SC is already lost. But the 'white curtain,' as you so aptly put it, looms large on Feb. 5th.

JOk-off, why are you so angry? Do you feel threatened? Career problems? Women problems? Money problems? What has you so frustrated and angry.

How about if you guys stop perpetrating racism and just report on what the candidates have to say on the issues?

How about if you guys stop trying to incite lynch mobs and just report on what the candidates have to say on the issues?

How about if you guys stop trying to create hysteria in order to sell your ad spots and just report on what the candidates have to say about the issues?

How about if you guys let the people choose the President?

Just one more person's take on this.... I'm an SWF who's liberal on social issues and moderate on economic issues. I'm not a big-time Democrat, but I usually vote Democratic.

I've been cheering for Obama since February, but until about eight weeks ago I would have been glad to support Clinton or Obama in the general. I can't say that anymore. Clinton has lost me after a series of steps I consider despicable: the racial comments (Penn's "cocaine" comments in particular, which demonstrated that the message is coming from the very top), the misrepresentation of Obama's record, the adoption of Obama's campaign themes and foreign policy proposals, the tears.

I see Clinton supporters saying the opposite -- that they're starting to get so angry with Obama that they won't be able to support him later. To me, it's a sign that the battle between them now has the potential to hurt either one of them as the nominee.

All the same, at this point I can't imagine supporting Clinton. If Clinton gets the nomination, I think I'll be volunteering for Bloomberg.

This is what Hillary considers "the fun part"? The attacking?

So tell Me: Are we having fun yet?

As a European watching this race from a
distance what I find shocking and always
have done is the success of the Clinton
mythology machine is blocking (from those
who never knew ) and wiping (from those who
once knew ) the litany of crimes against
humanity by the Clinton administration
and the death toll upon peoples of colour
including large numbers of Africans who
died terrible deaths as a result of the
policies of Bill Clinton, Al Gore and
the Mad Albright.

From the murder of 1 million Iraqi civilians
by the Clinton administration during the pre
9/11 decade as a result of the single most
genocidal economic sanctions in modern times
and the constant Clinton policy of US Air
Force bombing of Iraq throughout the 90's
that included the extermination of the
verified and documented death of at least
480,000 Iraqi infants (the compounded crimes
of Bush Snr and Bill Clinton having caused
their death ).
To Bill Clinton ordering during the most
hysterical week of the Monica scandal cruise
missiles drop on Sudan's only medicine factory
that produced essential life saving medicines
at low cost. The German Ambassador to Sudan at
the time told the Harvard Review that as a
result of Clinton's act of state-terrorism
upon Sudan in the absence of a supply of
medicines, tens of thousands of people mostly
children and old people perished. That is
AFRICAN people but still Black America's
deluded pro-Clinton fetish continued.
To the fact that for seven and a half of the
eight years of the Clinton/Gore admin they
acted as agents of American pharmo-corps,
the drug companies, in blocking the right of
poor countries to produce low-cost generic
AIDS drugs. By the time 14 million people
mostly Africans had perished from this denial
Al Gore was still defending in his capacity
as VP the exclusive profit rights of the
pharmo-corporations. But still Black American
leaders continued their relationship with the
Clintons and kept telling their people that
Arkansas hick Bill was their "first Black
President"...George Orwell could not even
imagine such sick minded delusion.
All over the world poor people and people of
colour suffered from actions and policies of
the Clinton adminstration. This included the
daily suffering and persecution of the
Palestinian people the lives of whom got worse
and worse during the years of the total scam
that was Clinton's so-called "peace process".
As for Hillary Clinton when during the Summer
war of 2006, in a criminal action carried
out by Israel upon the people and nation of
Lebanon, a war that was given the greenlight
by Dick Cheney many months before any
incident used as its pretext, there was a pro
Israel, Zionist rally outside of the UN in
NYC. As American bombs fired by Israeli pilots
landed on an orphanage, ambulances, homes,
hospitals etc Hillary Clinton told the crowd
of war loving, Arab hating Zionists that in
its actions in Lebanon "Israel is defending
American values".

Racist ??? The Clintons ?? The word does not
even begin to describe half of what they are!
They are racist in the extreme. Imperialist,
Zionist, neo-colonialist to the max.

Come on Americans stop mistaking killers for
Santa Claus !!

Obama supporters are very concerned with Clinton's racism but don't seem to be bothered by the homophobia and sexism coming from his surrogates.

Are Hillary's lesbian affairs while at Wellsley in play?

All the same, at this point I can't imagine supporting Clinton. If Clinton gets the nomination, I think I'll be volunteering for Bloomberg.

If Obama gets the nomination, I think I'll be volunteering for McCain.

"Obama supporters are very concerned with Clinton's racism but don't seem to be bothered by the homophobia and sexism coming from his surrogates"

I am an Obama supporter and a woman. I am worried about the sexism from the Media. But I must stress, I have really not seen sexism from Obama, or his campaign team - only from the Media

The solution, I think, is to have more women in the media, and then the coverage may be more balanced. Don't see how that translates into voting for Hillary...

I'm just going to use one of the racial insensitive remarks made by the woman herself, Hillary. Hillary basically said that MLK gave some good speeches but he got shot and it took LBJ to pass the VRA. She was comparing Obama to MLK and herself to LBJ. Bassically saying Obama may give some pretty speeches but that's not enough. Let see if this analogy holds any intellectual truth. For instance, if Hillary said Jesus just gave a bunch of good sermons but it took Constaine, the Emperor of Rome to cannonized the bible and make Christainity the state reglion therefore Constaine had was more important to Christianity than Jesus everyone would say this is blasphemous. In the AA community downgrading MLK involvement in the civil rights movement is blasphemous. And it should be blasphemous to all of the American Community. Hillary was attacking Obama's ability to connect with people through words something that she totally lacks. But history tells us, words are important, words and the movements built on those words are the key ingredient to change human kind beliefs and behavioral system. Yes, you need laws to effect those changes but you have to change the hearts and minds of people before they obey those laws. Laws enacted without buy-in from people (ie. prohibition of alchol). I will sumbit to you that The Sermon on the Mount, I Have a Dream, and A nation healed and a world repaired has and will have more impact on our society than mere litany of legistlative laws. Now imagine, a president that can combine the qualities of both a MLK and LBJ' legistlative ability (I would rather use Tip O'Neil because LBJ had some issues of his own), how great a lasting impact he would have in America. Hillary will never encompassed that sphere and that is why she is using everything in her arsenal to destroy Obama's character. And yes, she wants to race bait him so she can remove his "transcendental" qualities that he possess. It doesn't serve Hillary's motives to move beyond the partisan divide, because the Clintons don't know how to operate nor govern with out tranagulation. But in order to get to the WH, she is willing to cause the Democratic Party to fracture because she believes her tribe of women will hold together against all the other tribes within the democratic party.

"hypocrisy" comment is emblemtic of the way the Clinton people will blur the distinctions.

According to the clintons, it is just as much Obama's fault when chris mathhews says something sexist as it is Hillary's fault when Billy Shaheen, Bob Kerrey, Andrew Cuomo. etc make racial comments.

The playbook on identity politics is the same as the iraq war: blur the distinctions and neutralize the oppnents advantages. Lie and say Obama is playing the race or gender cards when Hillary is doing both right before all of our eyes.

The ability of the clintons to win is based on the naivte of your average voter. If she can fool a majority of voters she wins. If she cannot, she looses.

Triangulating, Divide and Conquer will not work this time in our history.

The only election where the Clintons managed to eke a 2-point victory and 0 delegate advantage is highly questionable. In a caucus (Iowa) that could not be rigged, they tried to disenfranchise students and failed. In another caucus (Nevada) that cannot be rigged, they're trying to disenfranchise casino workers by changing the rule of the game in the middle of the game and by pitting blacks against Hispanics. Can we beat them? Yes, we can! Si, se puede!

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Triangulation_Clinton_camp_pitting_Blacks_against_Hispanics
Clinton pivoting her campaign on Latino racism:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Clinton_Pivoting_Her_Campaign_on_Latino_Racism

" [Bill ]Clinton professed his admiration for Obama and insisted that he was only referring to Obama's lack of executive experience."

THE SAME COULD BE SAID OF HIS WIFE. SHE HAS NOT EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE. DOES HE SECRETLY HOPE THAT SHE DOESN'T GET THE NOMINATION OR WIN?

This is disgraceful. To imply that the Clintons are racist? The Clintons have been long time advocates for the African American community for decades! This is the most disgusting play of the Race card in politics that I have ever seen. What a smear job! The Obama camp should be ashamed!

Senator Obama "It’s that experience, that understanding, and not just of what world leader I went and talked to in the ambassador’s house who I had tea with.”

Congressman Jackson (national co-chairman of the Obama campaign)
"We saw something very clever in the last week of this campaign coming out of Iowa, going into New Hampshire, we saw a sensitivity factor. Something that Mrs. Clinton has not been able to do with voters that she tried in New Hampshire."

"Not in response to voters -- not in response to Katrina, not in response to other issues that have devastated the American people, the war in Iraq, we saw tears in response to her appearance. So her appearance brought her to tears, but not hurricane Katrina."

Pastor Donnie McClurkin (headliner of the Obama for Change tour)
on gay people
"The gloves are off and if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose?.I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."

When does sexism and homophobia become a trend?

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. You can recognize racial politics from the Clinton campaign but ignore it when it comes from the Obama campaign.
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26815

It should be obvious from the dirty papers the Obama camp were about to try and push to the press, filled with false, trumped up, out of context accusations of Racism, that Obama has decided that his best way to win is by playing the race card. DISGRACEFUL! Stop drinking the kool-aide people. This IS NOT Hope, This IS NOT Unity. THIS IS SHAMEFUL! Good Lord! I might actually go and volunteer for Hillary Clinton's campaign. I am so outraged, I feel like knockin on some doors and telling people the truth!

Ok, I am a woman and let me see if I can catch any sexist undertones here...

Senator Obama "It’s that experience, that understanding, and not just of what world leader I went and talked to in the ambassador’s house who I had tea with.”

My take - Perhaps a bit of a sexist tone here, but honestly, I am unclear what the role of a first lady is...is it not something like the 'queen' play gracious and have tea with dignitaries...?

Congressman Jackson (national co-chairman of the Obama campaign)
"We saw something very clever in the last week of this campaign coming out of Iowa, going into New Hampshire, we saw a sensitivity factor. Something that Mrs. Clinton has not been able to do with voters that she tried in New Hampshire.
Not in response to voters -- not in response to Katrina, not in response to other issues that have devastated the American people, the war in Iraq, we saw tears in response to her appearance. So her appearance brought her to tears, but not hurricane Katrina."

My take - honestly, I do not see anything sexist here...he is saying she is sensitive to only her own pain...is it sexist to imply Hillary is self-absorbed ?

Pastor Donnie McClurkin (headliner of the Obama for Change tour)
on gay people
"The gloves are off and if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose?.I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."

My take - no clue what this means or implies...


Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. You can recognize racial politics from the Clinton campaign but ignore it when it comes from the Obama campaign.

My take - just think the Obama campaign is playing cleaner...HRC started the tribal wars by using the gender card and Clnton supporters are trying to make it harder for voters to participate in Nevada

Shorter version of some comments here:

The Clinton campaign, despite putting out various comments and smears that are obviously racial in content and context, isn't really racist because Bill and Hillary have a good record on race issues.

The Obama campaign, despite scarcely mentioning race at all and making a point of not bringing things down to that level, is "playing the race card" because people loosely associated with the campaign are calling out the Clinton campaign on their bullshit.

That. Makes. No. Sense.

If Mark Penn is repeating the word "cocaine" as much as he can, and anonymous staffers are telling all of white America that its fondness for Obama is based on some juvenile need for a "hip black friend," then the Clinton campaign is quite obviously playing the race card. If the Obama campaign chooses to respond to it, they are not playing the race card———IT'S ALREADY BEEN PLAYED.

Well, tomorrow's NY times shows the jujitsu I spoke of in my earlier post in taking complaints of people not affiliated with the campaign like Clyburn and using them to say that Obama's campaign are the ones who are injecting race into the discussion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/us/politics/13clinton.html?ref=us

This article combined with her Meet the Press interview tomorrow, I predict, is going to drive the story a few more days as the Clintons want.

And it will be brilliantly spun as the the black folks getting upset over nothing (appealing to voters who think black people get 'special favors.'). And it will further the Clintons' goal to turn Obama into Al Sharpton in the minds of as many Feb 5th white and hispanic voters, who are happily tuning into the race right about now, do not have the close engagement of early state voters, and thus are much more dependent on the villager media for their impressions. In fact Clinton's campaign once told reporters they thought they would be stornger on Feb 5th than in early states since voters would make their decisions more basedon what the media spoon fed them as opposed to direct voter contact.

SO the media ,either biased or gullible, will be used as the tools by which the clintons will practice their politics of personal destruction while crying crocodile tears that, indeed, it is they who have really been victimized.

Some in the media might call them on their slime, of course. But those folks will be the ones lumped into the "sexists beating up on the woman" narrative.

Those of you in the media should beware: The clintons will use you like tools if you are sympathetic to them and they will savage you as sexists or ken starr-lite "clinton-haters"if you dare call them out on this.

Every day I am astounded with how shrewd the Clintons are in manipulating the psyche of the American people and the media.

That Barack has even stayed competitive with these folks given his short time on the national stage is a testament to his innate skills and strength.

Will David beat Goliath? We shall see.

Thanks, RKA, for pointing to the Times article. Perhaps Russert will pull his head out of his ass tomorrow and ask Hillary why she and her campaign are trying to suggest that people like Clyburn and Sharpton are working for the Obama campaign.

And here is the Associated Press version of the same article:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Clinton-Obama.html

Noticed that they even got the Assocated press to write a stroy being sent to low-infomtion, casual voters in local papers thoughout the country putting Al Sharpton and Barack Obama in the same sentence.

Mission accomplished, they must be saying over at Clinton headquarters. After injecting race in the discussion, the Clinton people have just conned the NY Times and Associated Press to spread the lie that the LBJ/MLK thing originated not in the borader black community but rather was some distortion coming from the Obama campaign, something that is demonstrably false.

They're cheering over at Clinton headquarters tonight because the media is dutifully playing into the "Black folks yet again getting riled up over nothing and making whites feel guilty" narrative and muddying the waters by hanging this around the Obama campaigns' neck.

Hillary says "I think" this all came from the Obama campaign.

Please, she knows well that people like Clyborn and Brazille came to opinions on their own on this.

This is yet another way the Clintons are brillantly turning Obama, somebody who has gone out of his way to be a post-racial conciliator , as "the aggrieved black candidate." By morphing him into Jesse Jackson in the eyes of voters, just as republicans morphed Max Cleland into the images of Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in the 1992 midterms, the Clintons are simultaeously playing "death by a thousand cuts" racial politics while tarring Obama as the racially divisive figure.

If this were a crime drama, the story line would be the innocent being framed by the real perpetrators.

God, the Clintons are really good at manipulating the media. I wonder if Karl Rove is giving them the advice he hinted to in the wall street journal this week?

True, the Clintons have no history of being racists.

Yes, they are running a brilliant campaign to inject racism into the campaign and make it look like it's Obama's doing. When every Obama supporter 'complains' about racist comments, 10 fold others decry Obama's "playing the race card." Absolutely brillant.

The 'fun part' is not fun for this older Anglo female who has no respect for non-racists who are willing to play to those who hate in order to win an election. I'd rather the candidate who uses race in an election be someone like Strom Thurmond; it would be much less manipulative and dishonest.

How are the 'first black president' and his wife able to look at themselves in the mirror?

As I read the above comments, I am repeatedly struck by how the trauma of racism, living just beneath the surface of public discourse, has now erupted. As a white upper middle class man, I'm also noticing how few people identify their own race, gender or class in their comments. Sometimes it's clear from the context, and I'm not pointing fingers. Instead I'm thinking about how rarely whites notice that our whiteness is not a lack of color, it's a very specific power position in our history and in our own psychology.

My personal belief is that if we are going to ever heal the wounds of racism (and I don't mean whites making up for what we've done and continue to do, that's a guilt-indued fantasy) we HAVE GOT TO ACKNOWLEDGE that (1) we are all over the place as far as unrecognized biases, blind spots, attitudes and intentions, and that (2) whites' biases etc. have the potential to do a lot more damage because of our relative power over every aspect of life in this country. Our white politicians are just as hung up as the rest of us, maybe more because of the distoring influence of their drive to power.

It would be really refreshing if there could be an open recognition from white politicians on both sides of the aisle that, Hey, I'm still working on my self-awareness here, I do harbor unconscious stereotypes, and in the rarified atmosphere of election politics I recognize that I have to be extra thoughtful and reflective (that's better than being careful not to offend) when it comes to the words I choose.

Barack Obama, whom I support, has a perfect opportunity here to say something to the effect of, You know, we can't close the barn door anymore, the horse of race is out, so let's begin the dialogue we need to have anyway. We're all afraid to have this conversation lest it be co-opted by either old hatreds or their newer version, identity politics. We are all afraid of being judged and misunderstood, and I'm guessing that people of color are also afraid that at the end of the day, we'll go back to our roles and inequities and isolation from each other, with nothing left to hope for because now it's been tried. What I think, thuogh, is that we have to begin, and expect that only some of us are going to hang in there and work through our misunderstandings and the reality of the deep hurts. In other words, victims and victimizers and bystanders alike all need to grieve. Only if we grieve together can we escape the endless cycle of avoiding the truth and avoiding each other.

Obama strikes me from his whole being and from his autobiographical books as someone who has struggled through many stages of racial identity, who stands quite genuinely and comfortably at the intersection of his many heritages and who can empathetical engage others who have not yet, or who will never have to, answer for themselves the questions he has had to answer.

There is a box we should be very careful not to put Obama in: he does not 'transcend race' as I have heard others say. I suspect that's another white fantasy of holding hands and ignoring history. Maybe when people say that they mean he can bring us together to have a true dialogue - that idea does make sense. Another danger is that we shouldn't expect him to do the work for us. It's our work, and it would be an easy out to say, Look, we can elect a black man to be President! No more racism! I have the clear sense, though, that Obama won't give us an easy out like that.

Finally I want to come back to the trauma of racism. I can see how the missteps, both calculated and uncalculated, made by Clinton and her supporters, fan the flames of distrust, anger, and anguish. I believe whites should be careful not to dismiss the reactions of blacks and other people of color (or whites seeking to identify) as overreactions, even when comments are taken out of context or attributed to the wrong person, as some were above. My observation is that once the wounds of racism have been touched, they cause so much pain that it is not so important what people exactly meant to say or even exactly what they said. Some people deliberately exploit distortions for political gain, but largely I think that any distortion that may happen is about pain. So my suggestion is that we not banter back and forth about who said it, why they said, or what their credentials are in terms of racial awareness. That's a waste of time and just adds more layers of misunderstanding.

Instead, let's talk honestly about ourselves as racial beings. Let's say what we feel hurt by, what we are ashamed of, what we are afraid of, what we feel sad and angry about, what has happened to us, what we have done to others. It's a unique moment in history, thanks to Barack and Michelle Obama and all those on whose shoulders they stand. Let's not waste it!

Obama cannot win support without using the race card as he and oprah started using early on.Now tha he lost NH, of course its back in the headlines, what else can you say, he hasno experience to lead...Clinton focuses on economy in Presidential race Obama focuses on RACE!LETS ALL CONTINUE TO DO THE JOB THE MEDIA FAILED TO DO, EDUCATING VOTERS AND NOT PUSHING AN INEXPERIENCED RACIST DOWN OUR THROATS!!! IN A TIME OF WAR AND PENDING WAR AMERICA WOULD BE FOOLISH TO THROW SUPPORT BEHIND OBAMA...IT WOULD BE THE LAST FALL OF THE US. WE CANT AFFORD TO GIVE HIM 4 YEARS ON THE JOB TRAINING SEE HOW THAT WORKED OUT WITH BUSH!!! SENATOR CLINTON IS THE BEST CHANCE WE HAVE TO START HEALING IMMEDIATELY! SEND OPRAHBAMA BACK TO ILL TO GET SOME EXPERIENCE AND SOMEONE NEEDS TO TELL MICHELL OBAMA TO SHUT UP!!! WHITES AND HISPANICS ARE EXTREMELY SICK AND TIRED OF HER RACIAL REMARKS!!!! WHAT A POOR EXCUSE TO BE FIRST LADY, SHE NEEDS TO LEARN TO BE A LADY FIRST! ALL AMERCIA NEEDS HELP NOT JUST BLACK FOLKS OBAMA!!!!

Hillary Clinton -- A Lifetime of Walking the Walk
Hillary’s record on civil rights isn’t just about what she’s done throughout her 35 years of advocacy, it’s about what she’ll do as President. Throughout her life, she has worked to protect civil rights and expand opportunities for African-Americans.
During this campaign, Hillary has advanced specific plans for increasing opportunities and empowering communities. From cracking down on predatory lending to creating opportunities for young people to protecting the vote to restoring the Gulf Coast, Hillary is laying out a clear blueprint for how she’ll empower African-Americans as President.
Growing Up and As a Student
* As a teenager, Sen. Clinton was inspired by seeing Dr. King speak in Chicago. [Living History, pg. 23]
* In the wake of Dr. King's assassination, Hillary organized a strike at Wellesley aimed at increasing diversity in the staff and student body. [New York Times, 9/5/07]
* As a law student she volunteered at the New Haven Legal Services offices, providing free legal aid to low income people, in need of assistance. Hillary said, "I realized that what I wanted to do with the law was to give voice to children who were not being heard." [Living History, pg. 49-50]
* Hillary took a job with Marian Wright Edelman's Washington Research Project in Washington, DC (later the Children’s Defense Fund). WRP couldn't pay her; she was awarded a grant by the Law Student Civil Rights Research Council. Later when she back to work for the Children's Defense Fund after law school, she worked on juvenile justice issues in South Carolina. [Living History, pg. 47-49; pg. 64]
* In the summer of 1972, Hillary challenged discrimination practices. (She gathered information about "Nixon Administration's failure to enforce the legal ban on granting tax-exempt status to the private segregated academies that had sprung up in the South to avoid integrated public schools.") [Living History, pg. 57]
* Hillary headed the voter registration drive in Austin, Texas for McGovern campaign, focusing on registering black, Hispanic, and young, newly-enfranchised voters. [Living History, pg. 58-59]
In Arkansas
* Upon moving to Arkansas, Hillary taught law and ran the University of Arkansas's legal aid clinic and prison projects providing legal assistance to the poor and incarcerated. [Living History, pg. 70]
* Hillary chaired the Educational Standards Commission to reform Arkansas’ education system to better prepare young people, particularly those living in low income areas, to thrive. [Associated Press, 1/27/93]
* She served as Chair of the Legal Services Corporation Board of Directors from 1978-80, a time of expansion for LSC. [Living History, pg.83]
As First Lady
* As First Lady, Hillary championed SCHIP which today provides health care to 6 million kids. [New York Times, 3/14/07]
* Hillary led new investments in child care, including Head Start. [PL 103-252, signed 5/18/94; The Washington Post, 10/7/98; USA Today, 10/27/98]
* Hillary fought to increase access to after school opportunities. [Chicago Sun-Times, 4/28/98]
* She worked on the Family and Medical Leave Act and later fought to expand it. [Christian Science Monitor, 6/24/99; The Post-Standard, 10/23/00]
* Hillary also worked on new initiatives to help families with long-term care needs. [Talking it Over, 1/6/99]
In the Senate
* As a Senator, Hillary co-sponsored the Count Every Vote Act with Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, a comprehensive reform bill that demands an electoral system that ensures that every voter is given the opportunity to vote and makes sure those votes are counted. [Clinton Senate Office press release, 3/7/07; S. 804]
* She's co-sponsored a number of measures to help the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, working to ensure that Katrina survivors get access to affordable health care, to protect the wages of workers in New Orleans, and to fill hundreds of teaching vacancies in New Orleans schools. [S. 2164, 12/21/05; S.1749, 9/21/05; S.808, 3/8/07]
As President
* Save the Civil Rights Division from eight years of the Bush Administration. Hillary will: Direct the Attorney General to submit – within 90 days of taking office – a report that recommends how to rebuild DOJ’s traditional role in defending civil rights and the rule of law, and that reviews charges of improper, politically motivated hiring to determine whether laws were broken. Restore professionalism and remove politics from hiring, case deliberations, and policy decisions across the Department of Justice. Increase funding for the Civil Rights Division by $30 million.
* Help local school districts pursue voluntary integration and reduce racial inequality, in the face of a reactionary Supreme Court. Hillary will: Direct the Attorney General to appoint teams of EOE (Equal Opportunity in Education) consultants and deploy them to advise local school districts who want to design the most effective and proactive voluntary integration programs permitted under the Supreme Court’s recent ruling. Provide $10 million to help school districts implement these plans.
* Strengthen our voting laws so that every citizen can fully exercise his or her constitutional right to vote. Hillary will: Sign the Count Every Vote Act into law. Combat voter ID laws that have a disproportionate negative impact on minorities. Extend voting rights to citizens of D.C.
* Combat ongoing racial and sex discrimination in the labor market by improving laws and expanding enforcement. Hillary will: Fully fund and reverse the staffing cuts to the EEOC and strengthen the employment section of the Civil Rights Division. Sign into law the Paycheck Fairness Act to end gender discrimination in pay.
* Modernize and strengthen the federal hate crimes law. Hillary will: Sign into law the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
* Rebuild New Orleans in the wake of Katrina, Hillary has ten concrete ideas for ensuring that the federal government doesn’t repeat the mistakes it made while redoubling rebuilding efforts including elevating the Gulf Coast Federal Rebuilding Director, expanding housing, building 21st Century school and revitalizing a lagging health care system. [Gulf Coast Recovery Agenda]

Alan, I agree with you about the discussion we need to have about race and I think that Obama will have no choce at this point to address this now in some way.

But the problems of race in this country are not going to be solved by super tuesday.

The high stakes battle of the next month is hardly the time to have the "national conversation on race" Bill Clinton once promised us.

This in sum total is a highly cynical, machiavellian ploy by the Clintons to change this conversation from our future challenges, what a campiagn should be about, to our old divisions.

Yes, we are all racial beings and none of us are free from racial nor gender based biases. But the obligation of our political leaders is to appeal to our better insticts and to make us do better as oppsed to thowing salt on the wounds of the past.

Barack Obama has been trying to lead us down a road to concilliation. And it has been working. The Clintons have harped on experience, distorted his record, etc and none of it has worked. And so their backs are too the wall. And what someone is willing to do when their backs are too the whole tells you a whole lot about them.

The Clintons have figured they are going to lose the black vote to Obama anyway and so they need to turn this disadvantage into an advantage by having the electorate racially polarized with whites and hispanics backing her and Obama becoming "the black candidate."

This whole "Are the clintons racists" canard is one big straw man that distracts from the issue. Of course, the clintons would not engage in a full frontal racial assault...they would get a backlash not just among blacks but the entire country if they did. They are using the republican playbook - use of code words, "Accidental slips," etc here adapted to the needs of a democratic primary. It's a bit of a high risk strategy for them, but its their only choice.

Today hillary Clinotn is doing whatever she can to make this the topic of conversation for as long as possible. He "death by a thousand (racial) cuts" strategy is designed to get Obama to slowly bleed white and hispanic votes. depress turnout among the idealistic drawn to him, and project onto Obama her own racially divisive strategy.

Look at this line from her NY times article:

“I don’t think either Senator Obama or myself want to see the injection of race or gender into this campaign,” she continued.

Calling that statement disingenuous would be a very generous understatement, coming from the candidate who said in the last debate that having a woman president would be change, whose naked appeals to gender triabalism are indisputable, while her surrogates throw racial poison pills into the media echo chamber.

And it's all plausibly deniable, of course.

The sad thing is that this stuff has the potential to work. Much of the electorate is casual, unengaged and susceptible to demagoguery. If George Bush can use the media to convince 2/3 of the public that Saddam ordered 9/11, is their any doubt that the Clintons can use the media to convince the casual Feb 5th voter that Barack Obama is a reincarnation of Al Sharpton?

The truth is the campaign discussion does not need to be about race. Hopefully Obama running isn't about race. Hopefully We keep the focus on war and economy and education but even the discussion about rich and poor here and abroad is about more than race.
Claiming mark penn keeps talking about cocaine is stupid when he said the word once in response to a question from chris matthews and then edwards guy (who used to be crazy dean's guy) tried to make that word an issue and penn said the word again to say he was nuts and that edwards guy was grandstanding and wrong. The paranoid dems and independents can claim this is a smear but he was doing damage control.
Obama is the dean in this campaign, the ralph nader right now. Support him if you want. But the race isn't about obama just as it wasn't about nader or dean or anderson or perot. Everyone can run as a spoiler and pick up independents and peel off the edges of each party: its a lovely system in that way. But he is essentially running a third party campaign right now. And as hillary said, he's very likable.

In the bipartisan battle of "experience" vs. "change," one thing seems clear: There is no shortage of experience in Washington. If Washington experience came by the dozen, it would be a dime a dozen. Washington experience is rarely what brings change, but is all too often precisely what prevents it. Washington experience fills our hearts and minds not with courage or hope but with fear. Washington experience does not say "Yes We Can" but "No We Can't." Washington experience is what has led us into the foreign and domestic mess we're in today. What we are short of in Washington is not experience but fresh ideas and unifying vision. Put a president with these in the White House, and all that Washington experience can be put to work taking America in a new direction. This is why I support Barack Obama for president.

RKA,
Thanks for your insight. Your statement that now is not the time to have the conversation on race, i.e. with the primaries as context, is certainly true. It will get so distorted by cynical power-grabbers that it could very well derail Obama. However I do think he can say something (maybe he already did, I followed the bumper sticker advice and killed my television) like, "Look, we can overcome our divisions and even the playing field if we work at it over time. Let's not get distracted by spin on race issues right now. Let's focus on getting fired up to take our government back." The main way he can begin the dialogue is to be himself, the way he already lets his Kenyan and Kansan and United Church of Christ and constitutional law professor and Chicago organizer and tender father and ga-ga over Michelle and MLK-inspired selves mingle and unite.

You know a separate and interesting question I'd like to hear what people think about is, "Some of us recognize the integrity and authenticity of Obama's voice. How do we know? What tells us that he's behind his words and not just the ultimate master of post baby boom politics?" Because I am absolutely sure of it, but I'm not sure what instinct is telling me. I almost don't dare to believe, as disappointed as I've been in the past. What do you all think?

Obama hasn't played the race card. Hillary has. Obama hadn't even commented on any of Hillary's shenanigans, until she tried to blame everything on him. Obama is not responsible for every statement from every african american who was offended by the Clintons. They're not his supporters. Neither Obama, nor his campaign, made any comments to the media until he had to defend himself from the Clinton's scheming.

The Clintons aren't racist. They're just using the issue to force Obama into a lose-lose situation. Brilliant and disgusting politics.

I will never again vote for a Clinton.
At this point, Bush is looking a whole lot better than he used to.

Congressman Jackson referred to Senator Clinton as Mrs. Clinton the entire time and then said 'we saw tears in response to her appearance, but not hurricane Katrina.'

The sexism is clear whether you choose to see it or not.

I've heard lots of people here talking about how we are all unconsciously racist and I agree. I further believe that extends to black, native american and hispanic people as well as the paler folks.

Here's the thing - we are all unconsciously sexist as well. When Jesse Jackson talks about Hillary Clinton as crying but not for Katrina what is that but not a sexist attack and a racist assumption? We see all the work Hillary has put in to black and other underprivileged people in America but where do we see Obama speak out against sexim? When will we see Obama fire those on his campaign who make sexist statements? When will Obama speak out when people, on his campaign, call Hillary nothing but an old white woman?

It seems there is a double standard at work here where sexism is ok but not racism and I don't like it at all. Both things should be just as damning.

More than one commenter has overlooked the fact that the Obama campaign is most definitely associated with charges of race baiting, not just "neutral" blacks like Brazille and Clyburn. Here are a couple of the errors I've seen:

RKA:

"This in sum total is a highly cynical, machiavellian ploy by the Clintons to change this conversation from our future challenges, what a campiagn should be about, to our old divisions."


julie:

"Neither Obama, nor his campaign, made any comments to the media until he had to defend himself from the Clinton's scheming."

Obama's campaign has been linked to a "race memo" that privately tells activists and reporters how to smear Clinton by linking her to "racially insensitive" comments -- the memo is here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

also the unfortunate Jesse Jackson, Jr. comments that Clinton cried over her appearance not for Katrina victims was a blatant attempt to cast her as unfeeling towards blacks.

Obama has not distanced himself from this memo, nor from the Jesse Jackson, Jr. comments.

Obama's campaign has not apologized.

Obama's campaign has not fired anyone.

Please, let's keep some perspective here. If Obama wants to keep taking the high road by refusing to make his a campaign about race, then he ought to hold his campaign supporters to higher standards than he has so far.

Personally, I'm not counting on him doing so. I'm a gay man still upset by Obama's outrageous handling of the Donnie McClurkin fiasco, and if it taught me anything is that Obama is all too willing to play the saint when it comes to "I'm a uniter, not a divider" rhetoric, but when he campaign commits gaffes like inviting an antigay warrior to go on stage and entertain Obama supporters, Obama is unwilling to admit a mistake, unwilling to apologize, unwilling to fire the staff who made the mistake.

I will gladly support Obama if he's the Democratic nominee, but Clinton seems to be to be showing the best instincts (though not perfect) in reigning in the loose cannons among her supporters.

To bring up this as racist is as racist as it can get from those who say it. Did everyone forget that the Clintons as young students supported MLK and went and heard his speeches?? What was Obama doing at the time? Drugs? True or False?? Obviously true!

CLINTON ALL THE WAY BECAUSE THE HAVE ALREADY PROVED THEY TREAT MINORITIES EQUAL AND WITH RESPECT!!!

Face up to the TRUTH! America is in need of a leader who has heart and soul, love and care for restoring the nation, not someone who is just seeking fame and more money. We do not need anyone to keep rasing the old rug from the floor to expose old injuries. If that were the case, the nation could reflect on the flip-flop attitude of Hillary, the mean and evilness of her personality, like being a Republican in '64 with Goldwater or being against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and even in current times making incredible promises to organizations for their support like promising the United Federation of Teachers of NYC that she would get rid of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act or to promise all kinds of jobs and positions to gain the support of black women like Stephanie Stubbs Jones of Ohio, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California.

We need a clean campaign. The people of America are tired, warn and beaten out from the last two elections, the Iraq War, the Job Sourcing, and the move to eliminate the Middle Class. The souls of America are crying out for HOPE, a turn around, and a future for their children. Is anybody listening? Barak Obama would be a fresh breath to America's household, a rejuvenation for building family, community and nurturing our young people who truly are the hope for our future.
Give the man a chance!

Face up to the TRUTH! America is in need of a leader who has heart and soul, love and care for restoring the nation, not someone who is just seeking fame and more money. We do not need anyone to keep rasing the old rug from the floor to expose old injuries. If that were the case, the nation could reflect on the flip-flop attitude of Hillary, the mean and evilness of her personality, like being a Republican in '64 with Goldwater or being against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and even in current times making incredible promises to organizations for their support like promising the United Federation of Teachers of NYC that she would get rid of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act or to promise all kinds of jobs and positions to gain the support of black women like Stephanie Stubbs Jones of Ohio, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California.

We need a clean campaign. The people of America are tired, warn and beaten out from the last two elections, the Iraq War, the Job Sourcing, and the move to eliminate the Middle Class. The souls of America are crying out for HOPE, a turn around, and a future for their children. Is anybody listening? Barak Obama would be a fresh breath to America's household, a rejuvenation for building family, community and nurturing our young people who truly are the hope for our future.
Give the man a chance!

Face up to the TRUTH! America is in need of a leader who has heart and soul, love and care for restoring the nation, not someone who is just seeking fame and more money. We do not need anyone to keep rasing the old rug from the floor to expose old injuries. If that were the case, the nation could reflect on the flip-flop attitude of Hillary, the mean and evilness of her personality, like being a Republican in '64 with Goldwater or being against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and even in current times making incredible promises to organizations for their support like promising the United Federation of Teachers of NYC that she would get rid of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act or to promise all kinds of jobs and positions to gain the support of black women like Stephanie Stubbs Jones of Ohio, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California.

We need a clean campaign. The people of America are tired, warn and beaten out from the last two elections, the Iraq War, the Job Sourcing, and the move to eliminate the Middle Class. The souls of America are crying out for HOPE, a turn around, and a future for their children. Is anybody listening? Barak Obama would be a fresh breath to America's household, a rejuvenation for building family, community and nurturing our young people who truly are the hope for our future.
Give the man a chance!

Face up to the TRUTH! America is in need of a leader who has heart and soul, love and care for restoring the nation, not someone who is just seeking fame and more money. We do not need anyone to keep rasing the old rug from the floor to expose old injuries. If that were the case, the nation could reflect on the flip-flop attitude of Hillary, the mean and evilness of her personality, like being a Republican in '64 with Goldwater or being against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and even in current times making incredible promises to organizations for their support like promising the United Federation of Teachers of NYC that she would get rid of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act or to promise all kinds of jobs and positions to gain the support of black women like Stephanie Stubbs Jones of Ohio, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California.

We need a clean campaign. The people of America are tired, warn and beaten out from the last two elections, the Iraq War, the Job Sourcing, and the move to eliminate the Middle Class. The souls of America are crying out for HOPE, a turn around, and a future for their children. Is anybody listening? Barak Obama would be a fresh breath to America's household, a rejuvenation for building family, community and nurturing our young people who truly are the hope for our future.
Give the man a chance!

Face up to the TRUTH! America is in need of a leader who has heart and soul, love and care for restoring the nation, not someone who is just seeking fame and more money. We do not need anyone to keep rasing the old rug from the floor to expose old injuries. If that were the case, the nation could reflect on the flip-flop attitude of Hillary, the mean and evilness of her personality, like being a Republican in '64 with Goldwater or being against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and even in current times making incredible promises to organizations for their support like promising the United Federation of Teachers of NYC that she would get rid of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act or to promise all kinds of jobs and positions to gain the support of black women like Stephanie Stubbs Jones of Ohio, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California.

We need a clean campaign. The people of America are tired, warn and beaten out from the last two elections, the Iraq War, the Job Sourcing, and the move to eliminate the Middle Class. The souls of America are crying out for HOPE, a turn around, and a future for their children. Is anybody listening? Barak Obama would be a fresh breath to America's household, a rejuvenation for building family, community and nurturing our young people who truly are the hope for our future.
Give the man a chance!

Face up to the TRUTH! America is in need of a leader who has heart and soul, love and care for restoring the nation, not someone who is just seeking fame and more money. We do not need anyone to keep rasing the old rug from the floor to expose old injuries. If that were the case, the nation could reflect on the flip-flop attitude of Hillary, the mean and evilness of her personality, like being a Republican in '64 with Goldwater or being against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and even in current times making incredible promises to organizations for their support like promising the United Federation of Teachers of NYC that she would get rid of Bush's No Child Left Behind Act or to promise all kinds of jobs and positions to gain the support of black women like Stephanie Stubbs Jones of Ohio, Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California.

We need a clean campaign. The people of America are tired, warn and beaten out from the last two elections, the Iraq War, the Job Sourcing, and the move to eliminate the Middle Class. The souls of America are crying out for HOPE, a turn around, and a future for their children. Is anybody listening? Barak Obama would be a fresh breath to America's household, a rejuvenation for building family, community and nurturing our young people who truly are the hope for our future.
Give the man a chance!

ajkruwz ebrnmyfsh txnrfu wemj ufwd szrdw shpdnjq

ajkruwz ebrnmyfsh txnrfu wemj ufwd szrdw shpdnjq