By Antonio D. French
Filed Friday, January 25, 2008 at 10:20 PM
In today's edition, The Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan says it as well as it can be stated... Labels: Clinton, Obama, Presidential_PrimariesWe begin, as one always must now, again, with Bill Clinton. The past week he has traveled South Carolina, leaving discord in his wake. Barack Obama, that "fairytale," is low, sneaky. "He put out a hit job on me." The press is cruelly carrying Mr. Obama's counter-jabs. "You live for it."
In Dillon, S.C., according to the Associated Press, on Thursday Mr. Clinton "predicted that many voters will be guided mainly by gender and race loyalties" and suggested his wife may lose Saturday's primary because black voters will side with Mr. Obama. Who is raising race as an issue? Bill Clinton knows. It's the press, and Mr. Obama. "Shame on you," Mr. Clinton said to a CNN reporter. The same day the Web site believed to be the backdoor of the Clinton war room unveiled a new name for the senator from Illinois: "Sticky Fingers Obama."
Bill Clinton, with his trembly, red-faced rage, makes John McCain look young. His divisive and destructive daily comportment—this is a former president of the United States—is a civic embarrassment. It is also an education, and there is something heartening in this.
There are many serious and thoughtful liberals and Democrats who support Mr. Obama and John Edwards, and who are seeing Mr. Clinton in a new way and saying so. Here is William Greider in The Nation, the venerable left-liberal magazine. The Clintons are "high minded" on the surface but "smarmily duplicitous underneath, meanwhile jabbing hard at the groin area. They are a slippery pair and come as a package. The nation is at fair risk of getting them back in the White House for four years."
That, again, is from one of the premier liberal journals in the United States. It is exactly what conservatives have been saying for a decade. This may mark a certain coming together of the thoughtful on both sides. The Clintons, uniters at last.
Mr. Obama takes the pummeling and preaches the high road. It's all windup with him, like a great pitcher more comfortable preparing to throw than throwing. Something in him resists aggression. He tends to be indirect in his language, feinting, only suggestive. I used to think he was being careful not to tear the party apart, and endanger his own future.
But the Clintons are tearing the party apart. It will not be the same after this. It will not be the same after its most famous leader, and probable ultimate victor, treated a proud and accomplished black man who is a U.S. senator as if he were nothing, a mere impediment to their plans. And to do it in a way that signals, to his supporters, How dare you have the temerity, the ingratitude, after all we've done for you?
Watch for the GOP to attempt swoop in after the November elections and make profit of the wreckage.
19 Comments:
Peggy Noonan was Reagan's special assistant from 84 to 86. She was the chief speech write for Bush I. She wrote a book titled The Case Against Hillary Clinton. Wow, she must really have an unbiased opinion on Democratic politics. Thanks for offering us this insightful piece from such an esteemed colleague.
I don't get why everyone thinks that the Clintons shouldn't use every weapon in their arsenal. This is politics. The name of the game is getting elected. Like you say Antonio, hate the game not the players.
I also don't think that voting for someone because they represent you is racist. Voting for Obama because one is black is awesome. To think that there would be someone in a political position that represents a person in their very being is simply awesome. I know I feel the same about a gay candidate--even if I didn't agree on every single issue, even better if I did.
Finally, what will everyone do if Clinton is nominated. Will Barak supporters have taken this so personally and have so much anomosity by that time that they will not vote. That would be a shame but it won't be Clinton's fault. Hate the game not the players.
1/26/2008 8:06 AM
Aside from Noonan's personal history, she's stilll right. But even she dind't say the blunt truth:
by injecting race into the equation, Clinton has painted (no pun intended) Obama as the black candidate, which he had transcended some time ago. Therefore, African Americans will rush to his defense in record numbers today in S.C., but white America who is still unsure about a black POTUS will be reminded that he is indeed black. Look at his numbers in S.C. among white voters; he's slipped to 10%! He never would have gotten this far with that kind of shite support.
So Billary, in essence is OK with conceding S.C. and moving on from there with him as the black candidate, while she emerges again as the probable, inevitable white choice. It's real fucked up.
And remember: this is a lose-lose for Obama. If he tells the naked truth when asked, and yes "hell yeah they injected race", then he Sharpton-Jacksonizes himself in the eyes of white voters who want to "move past" race as a talking point. If he downplays the race factor, then African Americans nationwide would potentially be disappointed at his lack of willingness to speak truth to power.
youngdem
PS: and I don't want to hear all Billary's apologies and bullshit concessions; by the time they got to apologizing the damage was already done.
1/26/2008 9:11 AM
Anonymous, when the Clintons use "every weapon in their arsenal" (including the nuclear Bill Clinton) then the Democratic Party has to be prepared for the fallout.
Barack Obama, for months has led a very successful campaign being the best candidate for change — a candidate that just happens to be African-American, but is not defined merely by his race. It was this campaign which led to his shocking victory in Iowa.
Since Iowa, the Clinton campaign has repeatedly interjected race issues into the campaign, trying to re-brand Obama as "the black candidate," which is his achilles heal in Super Tuesday states which distinct racial voting patterns.
They have conceded South Carolina and have instead used that state's large black population, along with the then-looming Dr. King holiday, to constantly bring race into the contest.
You're right, these tactics are not new. It's part of the game. But coming from President Clinton, whose political capital with the black community and loyal Democrats is the political equivalent of a nuclear bomb, it will have a devastating effect.
Speaking personally, people I know, blacks especially, like President Clinton less and less each day. And more, DISLIKE Hillary Clinton more and more.
In a close contest in states like Missouri, the difference between black voters being "Fired Up and Ready to Go!" in November or simply staying home can be decisive for Democrats.
Hillary Clinton is divisive America. Every poll ever taken shows that. But before the Clintons' all-out war on Barack Obama, the Clinton name was never divisive in the black community. Now it is.
We've gone through 10 years of divisive politics, I'm looking for something different. I believe Barack Obama brings that change.
And no one, no where can make any kind of an intelligent argument backed by any degree of evidence that can show Hillary Clinton is capable of bringing people together.
1/26/2008 9:11 AM
LOL. YoungDem, looks like we think alike! And apparently wake up at the same time too!
1/26/2008 9:13 AM
Barack Obama is really a neat candidate. His cultural experience, having lived in Hawaii and Asia for much of his young life, and born of parents of two races, he seems to offer a diverse list of reasons to attract supporters. He embodies many experiences that people can identify with. Honestly, it's refreshing that he is NOT black, and he's NOT white, he's simply an American. I think this perspective will help unite people.
1/26/2008 9:49 AM
ST LOUIS POST DISPATCH ENDORSES BARACK OBAMA!!!!!!!
1/27/08
Thank You!!
1/26/2008 12:06 PM
Well put, Antonio (re your first of two comments above).
Antonio French for Governor!
1/26/2008 12:22 PM
Frankly, the Post endorsement is not particularly helpful given what a disappointment that "newspaper" is to this community.
1/26/2008 1:14 PM
Anonymous said, "I also don't think that voting for someone because they represent you is racist. Voting for Obama because one is black is awesome. To think that there would be someone in a political position that represents a person in their very being is simply awesome. I know I feel the same about a gay candidate--even if I didn't agree on every single issue, even better if I did."
How do they represent you if they don't agree with you? Should I vote for the leader of the free world just according to the color of his/her eyes? Or b/c he/she prefers the missionary position? Please.
1/26/2008 3:15 PM
The Clinton campagin is now doing a blast call hitting Edwards for voting yes on permanent trade relations with China.
http://thepage.time.com/
Eventhough Bill put that on the table, and Hillary would have voted for it had she been in office, she is screwing with Edwards.
The Clintons have so much baggage that the mud they sling will always hit themselves.
BTW
Bill Clinton never recived 50% of the vote in his presidential campaigns.
1/26/2008 4:34 PM
This 45-year-old white woman just came home from voting early in IL -- for Obama and all his delegates.
And now I'm watching four white men trying to understand what's happening today in South Carolina. And talking about Bill Clinton more than anyone. Tiresome.
I think Super Tuesday could be very surprising to the Clintons, the pundits, and America.
Go Obama Go!
1/26/2008 7:32 PM
WE should all remember that Barack Obama had a white mother and a black father. I would suggest that makes him just as white as he is seen as black. Why don't we just look at the man and his ideas as well as his ideals.
Having previously voted for Mr. Clinton in the 1990's, his lack of civility has been extremely disappointing. It is the nature of these attacks that makes Mr. Obama look appealing to those who want to move beyond politics as usual. People are looking for integrity, and unfortunately, Mr. Clinton is bringing a lack of integrity to Mrs. Clinton's campaign. The fact that she is not reigning him in either speaks of weakness or who speaks about who is really running for the presidency.....Mr. Clinton.
In the end, as citizens, we all lose when such tactics are applied. This may be politics as usual as one bloggers suggests, but we want is a change from politics as usual. Clintons have demonstrated that their agenda is devisive, which will be what they bring to the White House should they win. That means their promises will never be carried out and Americans will lose in the face of politics as usual.
Thus, the only choice is Mr. Obama.
1/26/2008 7:52 PM
Can anyone direct me to a sight that reports Mr. Clinton's statements that everyone is talking about. In the media they just keep saying that he is saying things but they never play clips of what he is saying. I would like to see how much, if any, of this is media hype and how much is actually the content of Bill's statements.
1/26/2008 10:23 PM
re our simultaneous thought and timing, hahahahaa!!
-YoungDem
1/26/2008 11:28 PM
Here's one for the "I know you could have come up with a better word" files. The post-South Carolina headline from Time magazine reads:
Obama's Rout Rejiggers the Race
I KNOW they could have come up with a better term than REJIGGERS. Damn shame.
YoungDem
1/26/2008 11:34 PM
Im curious what my Christian brothers and sisters have to say about end times...and the current candidates..
1/27/2008 10:01 AM
Here' a little secret.. Obama is actually and African/European American.. He's half white.. How many people really know this??
1/28/2008 11:19 AM
anonymous 1-26 @ 3:15.
I agree wiht you whole heartedly. I will only vote for a white candidate because I'm white and that does not make me any more racist than you. I am looking for someone to represent the white community
1/28/2008 3:06 PM
I really don't care who is white/black or purple. I want someone who can start day 1 doing the job, not learning how to do the job. I think Clinton has that advantage. I am concerned with both Clinton's and Obama's govt. spending and wonder where they will get that money. I've heard once the war is over, they can use that money....BUT THAT MONEY IS BORROWED.....NOT UNITED STATES MONEY TO SPEND. I want to know how they plan to reduce the national debt, stabilize the economy, and get US soldiers out of places they never should have been. In business, it is always easiest to be preceeded by an idiot, as this makes you look smarter that you are. Unfortunately, following an idiot is not going to be a good thing for any of the candidates.
I still support Hillary. I think the men have messed things up really badly and it is time to give the women a chance.
1/28/2008 5:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home