For Bill Clinton, Echoes of Jackson in Obama Win

Source: Washington Post

On Saturday, as Sen. Barack Obama was sweeping up the South Carolina primary, former Pres. Bill Clinton was busy downplaying the significance of Obama's impending win, casting it as a function of the state's demographics and the Illinois senator's heavy African American support. "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88," Clinton said at a rally in Columbia. "Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

Read more: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/26/for_bill_clinton_echoes_of_jac.html

---

So there you have it. Dick Morris was right. The Clintons, with Bill as lead attack dog, are going to paint Obama as "the Black candidate" and appeal to underlying voter racism to push Hillary over the top. The Clinton's don't care about a backlash from the African-American community because African-Americans will vote Democratic no matter what in November. How cynical and sleazy.

Wow, I guess they aren't going to muzzle him. Big mistake.

He's absolutely right.

What's more...I'm sick of all the faux DU outrage about the Clintons supposedly trying to marginalize Obama as the Black candidate.

If Obama is now marginalized as the Black candidate...he did it so himself with his talk of "There's no doubt that if we consolidate the Black vote, there would be a profound shift in the national polls." And Michelle Obama's "Black America will wake up and get it."

The Obama camp has been the race-baiters in this campaign.

And I say that as an African-American woman.

truth. Not my problem.

you're expressing your bent and distorted with HATE opinion. And that makes it utterly worthless.

IT TRUE!! From the very beginning The Obama's and supporters..Jesse Jackson JR ((Co Chair!!!))..For GOD sakes...He was NEVER removed or scolded for his RACIST remark about Hillary.."WE...THe Omama campaign are STILL analyzing THOSE tears!! Where were her tears for the Katrina Victims" Excuse me... right before SC..excuse me...that was a completely messed up thing to say...NOBODY said a F*cking word about it!you disgust me with your blatant disregard for fact..honesty..get real...Obama won't get away with this much longer...one word REZKO!

..Edwards winning in 2004 although Sharpton was running?

free to vote for Obama, because he's more acceptable to the White community.

I wanted Al Sharpton to win the primary myself in 2004. Actually, I was proud of both he and Carol Mosley Braun in 2004. But I knew neither one of them were viable candidates.

We all knew that Al Sharpton was not a viable candidate.

But White people feel freer to vote for Obama---they view him as a non-threatening (read: non-militant, not stuck in the civil rights movement) African-American.

And so that has made African-Americans feel freer to vote for him..because of his acceptance by the White community.

...that really seems like a weak reason. Don't get me wrong, I'm not debating it's 'truthiness' here...athough I think your view is a bit simplistic.


If true, then it does sadden me that as voters, we're more willing to compromise our principles, so to speak, in order to vote for the 'viable' candidate during primary season. I think it makes things 'bland' and is a mechanism that ignores some issues that are of 'life and death' importance to some voters.

They are so yesterday. They are trying to relive the past when it is the future most of the rest of us are interested in. I'm not an Obama supporter as of now, but I may soon be if this Billary for President horror show continues. The political obituary of this Billary campaign is being written as we speak, by the Clintons themselves. How sad they reduce themselves to the cynical tactics of the Karl Roves of the world. The %50 + 1 vote strategy is all they have because she has such astronomically high negative numbers.

Obama is now my choice among the three left standing. He alone among the three has the ability to unify and inspire the country behind his administration.

I thought John Edwards' focus on corporate control of our lives/government was spot on as to our problems as a nation. However, I am really starting to pay attention to Obama's inspirational draw among people of all races/ethnicities and even political persuasion. Caroline Kennedy's endorsement is very strong and quite an eye opener as she explains that she sees the same inspirational qualities in Obama that she's been told people saw in her father. I am leaning in Barack's direction very strongly.

I'm so sick of these idiots.

interested in uniting the country or even the Dem party, and that's intolerable.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4219661

forgiveness.

And in the same tone I predict, "Howard Dean did not do the heavy lifting that everybody talks about. It was Hillary and I and we know how best to run the party and will be removing Mr Dean from all functions in the Democratic Party." Furthermore, the blogs will need oversight. They a have long been a nuisance to decent policy makers and this undermines democracy.

So I think your scenario is right on target.

if hillary is the nominee? It seems to me bill clinton has done enough damage to his image among african americans that they might question whether they'd be any better off with a clinton administration than with a repub in the white house. Particularly if the general election campaign evolves into a love fest between hillary and mccain as bill seems to think it might. After trashing obama, if bill puts the kid gloves on in the general election people might get the impression he really doesn't like blacks.

Time will tell I guess but boy he sure sounded nasty.

MONEY and POWER are *GODS* to The Corporate Clintonian DLC and their cronies. :thumbsdown:

Ask yourself, does the corrupt Clintonian DLC deserve to stack *our* Executive Branch for the THIRD (3x) Time?

*What will truly change with regard to the continued struggle for CIVIL RIGHTS if the 'new guard's (DLC)' campaign boss (Mark Penn) is cut from the same cloth as the 'old guard's (RNC)' campaign boss (Karl Rove)? :grr: :nuke:

We must bring people of all ethnicities together in order to OUST the "old guard" politicos of the D.C. ruling class.

We must change the dialog within this Nation. It won't be easy, but THE PEOPLE, united can kick out the old cronies and give Our Nation "a fresh start" toward reconciliation. :-)

Therefore I call this sort of accusation race-baiting

meant to cast doubt on the ability of a black man to win an election in this country. Bill Clinton is an ass who has been making vieled racial attacks on Obama for weeks.

"black" president, a "title" he will no longer be able to hold

Saying that Obama hadn't done the proper "spade" work. They may not be racist themselves, but they are certaily using racially charged terms and references to play into the minds of those who are.

who has done more for the people than bill or hillary ever have. the clinton`s racism is showing through their facade.

He's not doing his wife, nor the party, any favors.

And for all this talk about Obama winning because he's black..... Edwards won in 2004 with Sharpton on the ballot.

...contrary to assertions in some of the comments here. However, I do believe that the Clintons are unprincipled, as long as you do not consider the pursuit of power to be a principled position. And as unprincipled people, they are quite willing to use racism, sexism, or anything else to gain power, even if they don't hold those ideas themselves. It is all about winning, pure and simple.

It's a total lack of principle with focus on the ends justifying the means. It's almost evil.

Otherwise Bill and Hill would try to work her in there too just like the GOP always does with baby boom dem candidates.

I think Bill was too influenced by GHW Bush on all those tsunami trips they took together. He's acting like the very right wing smear machine he and Hillary both ran against. Yuk?

Look, I think Bill Clinton was foolish to mention Jackson when and how he did last night. For one thing it was the LAST thing HE should have noted in the glow of Obama's victory in SC given the recent history of this campaign.

But I understand how Hillary's campaign might legitimtely make note of Jackson winning SC before. It should have waited until today not last night, and it should have been a generic campaign spokesperson, not Bill Clinton, making the lower key observation. It is valid to point out that SC has it's own unique voting characteristics because Hillary Clinton has to make the case for why her poor showing last night should not be used to predict the results on Feb 5th. Momentum is part of the political equation, it can't be ignored. SC has a documented history of being highly receptive to Black candidates in the past, Jackson happens to be that documentation. It is true that Jackson won other states also in the past but SC is the first state that has voted this year that Jackson won in the past, so this is the first time that can up.

If Hillary wins New Mexico, the fact that she has strong support from the Hispanic community which is disproportionately represented in the first state to elect an Hispanic Governor, will likely be noted by her opponents.

I do understand that Jessie Jackson, even though he ran as the rainbow candidate, was perceived more to be a civil rights candidate making sure that Blacks got a seat at the table, so seeming to equate Obama with Jackson can be seen to be "playing a race card". Bill Clinton should have known that. The observation he was trying to make should have been made in a much more dry manner by someone other than him.

But Politics = Spin. Everyonne, and I mean EVERYONE does it. Stuff all over the top fake outrage. We are not meant to live in constant anger.

IIRC, not sure how one has anything to do with the other. Obama wins a normal primary, jackson won a couple of caucuses (post-nomination?), not good analogies. Edwards was a much more obvious analogy, as he became a VP nominee.

The clintons are playing the race card, pure and simple.

i think bills core point is : that south carolina was about black people voting for a black candidate, and how this specific contest is not comparable to the rest of the contest to come.

While on facts alone i believe bill does have an arguement (if his arguement is that a black candidate has a better chance of winning south carolina), facts alone are not the only things that matter. Context, leaving out other relevant facts, timing, a host of other factors are also relevant. Its the exact same thing as what hillary is doing with the florida/michigan delegates matter. Why didnt bill clinton state BEFORE the vote "hey just remember folks, jesse jackson won here before." While obama is talking about getting different demographics together (and doing it) , bills talking about demographics staying apart.

Getting dizzy here. And angry.

preview last night in Tn. There was no mention of obama and race and all that silly stuff as HRC spoke to a great crowd of people. Clinton Bill that is spoke of jackson and whatever while he ws standing in s c..... understand a lil' now what tis coming? HRC will be out front during the next ten days as we head into 2/5.....Bill will be used when there is talk about the economy and no one better then Bill to talk economics as HRC campaign has Rubin and Sperling on board.....So for all you obama folks that were hoping this race card crap would continue, I am sorry to inform you....NOPE.....going directly at obama and his policies and his positions and one damn smart move.....

So all you folks that were so happy to label bill and hillary bigots and racists over the last several days to weeks get you a new vile name ready, cause it is not going to be about race......it is now time to turn it on about the RACE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE....and where obama will fall will be his campaign trying to inject race back into the campaign and if he or others do then falling right back in a trap......

Oh obama gives one hell of a speech and that is good, but other than that what does obama stand for? really? on 2/5 I see obama winning ill. ala ga and maybe 1 or 2 more but 16 to 17 hrc will win....uh huh

It's repulsive to see a Democrat - and particularly an ex-President - using it today. God, Clinton has really shamed himself with these recent gutter politics.

My new nephew will probably study this race in a political science class in college.
I would have hoped he would be reading about the president I knew as a college student in the nineties.
What a terrible disappointing mess this has devolved into!

That's when they pulled out the "maybe he's a drug dealer" card.