While DU was fighting off the whatevers that took down the site, I watched The Daily Show.

I think I watched the end of her campaign. Without a doubt. Done. Finished. When the audio of her FULL remark played...working people, hard-working white people... the audience was quiet at first. One of those stunned silences. Really an unusual moment. Stewart had this look like... I know, it's freaking unbelievable, isn't it?

And now there is no way that she will EVER win the democratic nomination, even if she tries to seat MI and FL in some way because the super delegates cannot put a democrat up as a presidential candidate whose racist remarks are there to play over and over for the democratic base. There is no way they can win with her in the nomination. None.

Tho I was happy to take the gloves off and work to make peace between supporters here - I still feel that way toward people here, but as far as Clinton goes - she not only jumped the shark, she ended up... trying to take an ax to the demoratic donkey on her way over. or something like that. sheesh. creepy. one of those moments I will not forget for a while.

Because I would argue even Begala's "Eggheads" are hardworking.

well, it sounded bad to me that is

But I haven't actually heard the entire interview, only a long string. Still, if she did say "working class" it was far enough before or after that it wouldn't help in the context.

Citing an Associated Press analysis "that found how Senator Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me," she went on to say: "There's a pattern emerging here."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/05/09/clinton_remarks/

I forget why I decided to read it in relation to the above referenced quote.


Here is what Joe Conanson said that struck me.




I disagree with the conclusion, but the reasoning hits why people do talk pass one another in conversations about race.




I have found it difficult to read some of my favorite writers during this primary because the things that seem to drive them crazy, I don't see or understand...cling/bitter or bowling. Here, one of my favorite writers from the unpacking the Clinton Chronicle smear days comes out and sees a little of what Hillary Clinton has been cooking and African Americans have been eating. His argument about what I think was indefensible is troubling and aggravates me, but at least he can hear that dog whistle the Hillary Clinton campaign has been blowing too.


Using Lani Guinier's expression, African Americans remain the canary in the mine when it comes to issues like this. Before it becomes an explicit statement, we saw the pattern and recognized the writing on the wall. No way we would support that campaign's pattern. Who will they target next?

"Well Kathy you know there was just an AP article posted uh that found how Senator Obama's uh support among um working, uh hard working Americans, uh White Americans, is um weakening again, uh and how, uh the you know Whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me, and in, in Independents um I was running even with him, and and doing even better with Democratic-leaning Independents. I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on."

about Obama being treated well by the press..she just loves to quote something to make her lies for the day.

Forget that it was said by a Clinton. Who would give that candidate, given he/she had any other name, the time of day after a lame statement like that?

I don't think even any of our most minor candidates have made statements that bad. It's about on a par with a Mitt Romney or a Rudy Guliani.

I've always thought that when her campaign used the terms "hard-working Americans" or similar phrases, they were basically using them as code for "white folks." I think she confirmed that today. She said, in the same breath, "working, hard-working Americans, white Americans." Unless you really think "working" and "hard-working" Americans represent different demographic groups, then she's presumably talking about a single demo here -- which means that she apparently thinks the term "hard-working Americans" is synonymous with "white Americans."

Is Senator Clinton really saying that there are no hard-working black Americans? I can't believe my ears. I wish I could come up with some kind of reasonable construction of her words that would allow me to give her the benefit of the doubt, but it's looking pretty grim right now.

:shrug:

I hadn't heard her remarks before this show. I didn't even know there was this audio tape. I noticed today that there were more than a couple of posts/remarks from people here that surprised me b/c they were, frankly, racist. I replied to some of them. But I wasn't dogging after every word Clinton said over the last few days.

Just to say how outside of whatever loop there is... I am there, like it or not. :/

So when I saw this program... As you noted in your post, it was the way in which the adjectives were put out there. The inflection was on WHITE people. You can hear it in the link someone posted below. I did watch it again, and the initial quiet goes into "boos."

hard for it, not hoping for it, were deliberately using a racial stereotype. She began using that line immediately after she lost Iowa. She was implying that she works hard and Obama does not. They tried to characterize Obama as the naturally gifted, but lazy, black, while Hillary was the gritty white person who worked hard and never gave up.

My post was before South Carolina, and it was pretty much met with ridicule. But I believed it was true then, and I believe it is true now.

Funny how Clinton never mentioned the white vote leading up to North Carolina, with 35% black vote, but as soon as she sees white states ahead on the calendar she starts talking about white people again.

Do I think the Clintons are racists? No.

Do I think they would use racial stereotypes to stoke white resentment in order to win the presidency? Yes.

CANNOT explain. --- I think if you hear the dog whistle, you should sound the alarm especially in regards to this quote.




I think racial code should be challenged. I'd rather hear the bald white voters=hard working Americans assertion, than trying to decode a statement to figure out if someone is calling me epithet.

At some point, I don't care how you try to explain the behavior we should accept it. It is what it is. Nothing can be done to change the initial quote especially when there are so many hard-working references in regards to the white voters she says Obama can't win.


The question I have had from the beginning is: does this mean every time we hear a racially offensive remark we send them out to David Duke pasture?

My answer has become no. The Clintons thought this racial tactic was helpful. They have employed it for a while. I don't think Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton should be sent to the Hills so they can do a Joe Liebermann or Zell Miller. Instead, I think they need to have some reconditioning.

Ferrero Dukakais won at least 80% of the African American vote in the general election. Bill Clinton won more than that. Both campaigns taught us something about ourselves.


Ferraro can think and speak about race so long as she is not denouncing someone's candidacy along racial lines. I'm thinking something along the lines of 'Obama is fresh and new. There are people out there who like them because he is fresh and new.' If people ask you what you really mean, don't say what you said in response...they're attacking me because I'm white. How about you say something like, 'he is a fresh face to this process and he is brand spanking new. In these days of politics as usual, he does not bear the scars of fighting against Republicans for every single issue over the last 30 years. We have a record. He can't stand on the 3 years he's been in the campaign.'

No dog whistle attacks there, just an experience argument.

With Clinton, the same thing. 'I've run in over 40 contest thus far. Obama continues to fall behind me in achieving a consistent down scale voter. I have received all this support because these voters identify with me. I can't imagine what he is or can do to get these voters.' It is an overstatement mixed with a different reality, but hey it is still within the reasonable people can differ territory.


Nothing is beyond reconciliation. We are all Americans and have a straight forward legacy on race. That being said, I don't want her on the national ticket. She has said more than one thing which has not been true to the facts.

Maybe her brand of politics plays well in Harlem *sarcastic declaration*, but it will not work on the national ticket. You have 4 years to work on a reconditioning that will allow you to win Harlem and other parts of New York State in your rebid for your Senate seat.

I don't think they're racists either. I just think they're w/o scruples, ethics.. -- they offer more of the same. which is exactly what we don't need now.

As far as the "hard-working" bit - my "race-dar" isn't as finely tuned, I suppose. I would never assume the first statement you wrote would mean anything other than an attempt to say she has more experience (even tho that's not true in real terms - it's a valid campaign "attack.")

As a female, I'm more attuned to attacks that get turned into can't take a joke kinds of things. While DU was down, I was looking around on photobucket at any interesting pictures/graphics and I was disgusted by the attacks against both Obama and Hillary that were there. More against Obama than Hillary, which may be another measure of how much stronger his candidacy is. -- I don't think those attacks were from Hillary supporters, in other words.

Jonathan Alter just noted that her statement isn't true anyway, no matter what the intent. Hillary's majority is among older women (who are on fixed incomes, remember.) These women are part of our American family who need to know that they are not going to be left behind as the nation goes forward. These are grandmothers who have lost spouses, maybe they cared for their families all their lives, and they are getting eaten alive by Bush's economic policies. They are ones who know the sticker shock of unreported real inflation in places like the grocery store. Who can't go out and find a job when their electric bill and food bill become too much for their pensions.

So, rather than ridicule these "dead-enders" for Hillary, the Obama campaign and supporters need to develop a strategy to reach out to these women and treat them with the love and kindness we would show for our own grandparents.

At least that's my take after the last week.

your conscious mind is trying to block out. She knows she's done. Inside she knows it. But, damn, it's got to be really, really tough to turn off the programming you've put yourself through for months and years. It's not a switch you just throw. So, the subc. helps her (self) out by throwing in the word "white" to just sort of nail the coffin shut.

Now, where did I put that "The Doctor Is In - 5 cents" sign? :)
:dem:

I believe they are making a deliberate effort to portray Obama's support as shif'less lazy nigras, lazy white trash, and ultra-liberal, ivory tower elites.

That's just how low the Clintons have gone in their desperate power grab.

..anytime soon. Should she? Does she have reason to? But, will she?

Thanks,

PB

I just mean that in that moment, she alienated all sorts of people - white people of every description - what's Stewart's demographic again?

No. what I saw was the implosion of her campaign. it's just over. I don't know how to say it, but as another person said who also saw it... it was just awful.

collapse under its own weight. I have a feeling that when the full financial report for April comes out later this month that that will be a heavy blow. I'm skeptical about that $10 million in one day claim.

on clinton's words. she's not going out with a bang but with whimpering racial cries.

Your's is the first mention I've seen that the sight went down. About 9pm for me and I was trying for a couple of hours to get back on.

a great addition to the Supreme Court, but after hearing the audio for myself, I don't even think I want her on the court, let alone as VP.

would have said it was hers to lose, and although I wasn't excited by her as a candidate, I could have lived with her. I've been revolted by her tactics of the last few months. :wtf:

several times tonight elsewhere. On Stewart, for some reason, it was especially jarring and disturbing.

Tomorrow, the party leaders need to end this and tell the WORLD the Democratic Party does NOT condone racism.

changed?

"I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on"
that's all I can remember.
I just had a Pimms and soda.

This will really fester over the next couple of days.

They're slightly different.
The meaning is the same.
I pointed out that the reason why the daily show clip was more powerful was because they slightly rearranged the soundbites from the Kiely interview.

Cheers

pantsuit.

...If she keeps this bigot-pandering shit up, she may just piss off enough black voters that a significant backlash against Democrats will happen, and some of the House Dems may lose their seats. Not by the blacks voting for McCain, but by the blacks (and their sympathizers) just not bothering to vote for Congressional candidates.

she is me but hilary is rendering herself insignificant and we will persevere without her.

What is 92% of the vote against Hillary Clinton?

Have you read some African American websites these days? Mention Hillary Clinton and see what happens.

the blacks...not operative

blacks ok
African Americans alright.

The blacks sounds like a conspiracy is afoot...

Dean already said on Fox News Sunday that Democrats do NOT EVER run race baiting ads like the Jeremiah Wright ads aired in North Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisana. Chris Wallace stumbled for a few minutes and said Obama said this was fair game, you mean race baiting? Dean said, yes race baiting. We have never run that kind of campaign and we have stood against it for the last few election cycles.

I don't see how Dean can be more clear cut than that. I agreed with him, Democrats don't run ads like this nor do they run campaigns like that either.

As for the Congressional campaigns that might go down over this language? Who knows how aggrieved African Americans might feel after dealing with racial code in the DEMOCRATIC PARTY in year 2008. I'd say some explanations on the DNC's behalf might be in order. Maybe the DNC should put in the party platform: Thou shalt not race bait in the primary or in the general forevermore.

...but I would request that you not construct a suggestion of conspiracy from the presence, or absence, of the word "the." Thanks.

was it hacked?

I looked at comedy central too and they have yesterday's show. isn't there anyone with tivo in the DUniverse?

It will be on tv again, where I am, in another 30 minutes. maybe crooks and liars has it - I'll see. maybe someone else knows a site that has this sort of thing up before it's officially up.

My 17 year old daughter who is graduating from HS next month, and who going to be interning with Barbara Lee congressional offices asked me about it. She's been really turned onto politics, and has been watching KO with me. She asked me why Hillary Clinton felt compeled to name a skin color when talking about hard working Americans. I told her that Hillary has kind of lost it based on her career disappointment....and no longer realizes how her words affect Americans everywhere; folks of all color. :(

but then the primaries took over and that couldn't
be posted in GD.

Barbara Lee is my rep and I've never been more pleased with a congress person. She's one of the best reasons to move to Berkeley.

she graduated early actually, but will be walking the stage on June 13th! :headbang:

She's my youngest.

they would be all over this. Fact is, they're already poo-pooing it because then they'd look like the bunch of hypocrites they really are.

all over this 'cause they're desperate for hilVSmccain..either one would work for them.

If ANY other candidate had said this--especially a republican--it would be a major scandal. It's shameless--soul-destroyingly shameless--race baiting. Loathsome.

"Hers is not an appeal we'd tolerate from a Republican candidate, nor should we from a Democrat, no matter how sterling her progressive credentials might otherwise be."

"well, maybe she didn't mean it the way it sounded."

The hell she didn't. There's only one way to interpret that, and she had to have rehearsed it.

because this lazy latte sipping welfare queen aka non-important/non-white voter won't have her back. Not this time. Not ever!

"Where's all the black people!?" A case study in product placement? Maybe. I say 'hope & change' deferred for a time uncertain. Maybe till it's over who can say...People only *really* want to see one side of the coin, the side that has their call on it, Friend-O :thumbsup:

At least four of them are African Americans. That means about 16% of the populace of the picture is AA while approx. 10% of the country is. Seem's representational to me. :shrug:

But again. The picture shows inclusiveness.

so they're actually being under-represented.

MUAD_DIB has a better eye than I have. :)

... since it's difficult to agree on the racial makeup of an audience from such a small photo, and without actually asking each person included in the picture what their racial background is. (Or are we to assume that all the pale-faced folk are NOT African American?) What about Latinos? Asian Americans? Are they properly represented?

Lame joke by TDS, if they made it, and extra-lame counter by the poster who related it.

(Though it provides a good rationalization for any campaign that spends time organizing the crowds at rallies for proper demographic makeup.)

:shrug:

I'm really not sure what you're getting at here.

they made the point, you got no sense of humor? that's fine; not everyone does and *that* is a given as well

It just wasn't funny without context, maybe.

I don't know what to tell you.

:headbang:

are blacks. At least that's the implication I got when I saw it.

Yes, 90%-ish of African Americans voted for Obama, but 90% of Obama's voters are not African American, which is what the statement communicates.

Bad logic and an ignorant statement, were TDS to have made it.

But aren't we splitting hairs here?

Obama rally: 13000 people. In the same space, within a week (actually before this one, even) Clinton: 3000 people.





There was no product placement in these people showing up of their own accord. There are more white people than black people there. Lots of working people. Hard working, white people. And also Asians and blacks and people from the continent of India and Native Americans and... I'm trying to think of the various "ethnicities" I saw there. The rally was very representative of the city in which it was held. :shrug:

Sorry!

I meant hair. White hair.





Edited to note: This was snark and only snark meant to jab back a little at all the racially charged comments coming from Hillary right now.

"The only difference I can tell with Hillary's crowd are the white hoods.

of the primary. Where the image is, sometimes, or clearly can be; more closely controlled. As was the case in that pic but again...cherry picking one's way through the daily show like the produce aisle is to miss the point *of* the daily show imho :) And if that is to be the case...then the speech pic is not representative of the demographic you witnessed @ the rally :( And that is, I think, the point the writers of the daily show were making even if they are Obama supporters which I believe to be the case

I'm just glad someone is able to still retain their sense of humor ;)

subtlety and irony are hard to read sometimes. :/

What's even more strange is when Hillary has 2 or 3 in her background, when they are only giving her 10% of their votes, kinda of like Bush.

It sends out the clear message that not all white women are afraid to vote for a black man (or a mixed-race man).

Better than those idiots in the Abercrombie & Fitch shirts talking on their cellphones (Obama's post-Pennsylvania speech).

HERE

PB

She'll need to win WV with 86% of the vote to stay in the race mathematically. But she and the MSM will tout her "big" win as proof that dumb whites prefer her--and she'll use it as leverage for raising money.

Obama is currently slated to get only 27% of the vote, but there's 14% undecided. Hillary's "dumb white vote" theory has me so pissed, I think I'll do some WV phonebanking for Obama this weekend!

:headbang:
rocknation

tomorrow could be the day

I want them penniless and just a couple of drunken crackhead beggars pissing on themselves at this point.

They can both crawl back into the same sewer they crawled out of.

I had little respect for the way she has carried out her campaign. Now I have none... and she is demeaning herself and the Democratic party with each day that passes.

Conan's joke centered around Barack Hussein Obama. The audience really didn't crack a cackle. I think that is done now, too.....

got just about everybody with that one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5896190

I checked her old speeches and typical wording, too, since I thought it was a bizarre comment. And once I looked at the wording she uses, I realized that recent comment was completely misunderstood.

She uses the words "hard working" or "working" consistently in her speeches when she means "working class" (I could not find an old speech where she used the words "working class"). I have some quotes from her speeches and a link to show that she did simply mean "working class." It was in no way meant to imply that whites work harder.

And she was simply referring to an AP story mentioning voter demographics, and that topic has a link to the story.

Coded or uncoded blatantly racial overtones have no place in Democratic circles.

She needs to apologize.

Period.

Let's be honest with ourselves and each other. In NO WAY, can you believe that Hillary Clinton has once again been MISUNDERSTOOD? Don't try to push a misunderstanding at me?

For one hard working can be viewed as the white hard working line repetitively used in speeches before too. There is a pattern to her supporters, her representatives, and what not that this black guy cannot win white people.

She finally said it herself. Explaining what she could have meant is besides the point. I have not tried to explain Obama's "typical white person" or bitter/cling to statements. It was a bad choice of words even though I understood what he meant. Obama was roundly criticized and harangued for these statements even though the media knew what he meant. Those statements work as a wedge for those voters that have misgivings about him already. After that, they didn't give him the benefit of the doubt. It was OVER for him getting their understanding when it came to his explanation.

Do you expect me to believe she does not have an ungoing pattern in this primary?

She has consistently received a pass until she said something explicit.

There are only two ways that you can take her statement. One makes no sense; the other can only be taken as "hard-working Americans = white Americans".

it is pretty ugly to hear of believe you heard.