On March 18 of this year, Barack Obama delivered a powerful and much-needed address on race in America. It is past time for Hillary Clinton to do the same.
I say it is past time because, in recent weeks, we have seen troubling signs of a racial divide within the Democratic coalition, some of which has been fueled, whether intentionally or not, by the Clinton campaign and its surrogates.
Even if Senator Clinton did not mean to disparage Barack Obama and Martin Luther King, Jr., with her comments in New Hampshire; even if Bill Clinton did not mean to dismiss Barack Obama's win in South Carolina (or for that matter Jesse Jackson's 1988 victory), with his off-hand comments after that primary; even if Geraldine Ferraro had a deeper point in mind (although, for the life of me I can't figure out what it might have been); even if the former president did not mean to imply that, as long as Obama was a candidate, race would intrude on the great debate this country needed and would only be able to have if McCain and Clinton, "the two patriotic Americans," were the candidates; even if the Clinton campaign did not mean to keep the Jeremiah Wright story alive long after it should have been put to rest; even if Senator Clinton and her surrogates did not intend to continue to raise questions about Obama's patriotism and religion but were only answering questions they were asked; and finally, even if she was only quoting the Associated Press by noting that "Senator Obama's support among working, hardworking Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites... were supporting me" -- the simple fact is that at least in part due to all of this, race has reared its ugly head in this primary in a deeply divisive way.
Those of us who have been out campaigning have heard it. Those of us who are superdelegates have received emails suggesting only Clinton can win, with the not too-subtle implication that it is because only she can win over white voters. That, of course, is not true as Iowa, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Illinois, among many others have clearly demonstrated.
For decades now, Republicans have exploited race and fear as weapons in ugly campaigns to defeat Democrats. Nixon's, Reagan's, and George H.W. Bush's campaigns come to mind. I do not recall race being used before in a Democratic presidential campaign.
There are those who suggest that, when this campaign is over, the party will unify. I believe that waiting is not an option. Senator Clinton needs to clear the air and drain this poison from our party before any greater damage is done. A speech on race would be a sign of real leadership, and genuine healing, and bring us closer to the victory we so desperately need in November.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I agree that she should do that. It will not help change my view of her though. She has done irreparable damage to her reputation with me. I will never vote for a Clinton in life again.
Hillary's entire support is from committed feminists who are in love with her (a love that blinds them to all her lies and her extremely insulting rhetoric that assumes voters are highschool dropouts) and from white racists. Why would she throw the racist half of her coalition under the bus? The part I don't get is how does she win the general election when the racists all defect to McCain and Obama's supporters, especially those in the AA community, have been completely alienated. I guess she just wants to be the first female nominee of a major party and knows she has no chance to be president.
Obama gave a great race speech.
Hillary should give a great SEXISM speech.
"with the not too-subtle implication that it is because only she can win over white voters. That, of course, is not true as Iowa, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Illinois, among many others have clearly demonstrated"
JAMES.....those contests were back in FEBRUARY.....before Rezko, Wright, Bittercling, Bad debates, Michelles mouth, etc etc etc.
Since then, he does NOT WIN WHITE VOTERS.......and if he wasnt black, his numbers with them would have gone down, as well.
It isnt a race thing....he's a BAD CANDIDATE NOW.
You say he's a bad candidate now, yet nothing's changed in his positions on issues that really matter like healthcare, war, and the economy.
Hillary's slogan should be-
Hillary '08-She's not black
Her last two groups of supporters-Old white ladies, and racist white people. You go girl!!!!! Way to be a "uniter not a divider"
Northeast 73...get a grip! Hillary has won the votes of people that would never lay down their bias and elect a black man...very much like yourself. Guilt by association is as old as dirt when it comes to smear campaigns for the racist that are looking for reasons to display their hatred in the voting booth regardless to their economic situations. They voted for Bush over Kerry because of their racism...NOW look at the shape America is in! All of the rednecks that voted in WV were voting against Obama instead of voting for Hillary...and she knows that. If she were to get the nomination...most of those same rednecks would not vote for a woman! By the way...the BAD candidate is the candidate that have divided the democratic party. Take your sheet off brother...it is a brand new day! Obama has generated new swing states that is why he is ahead...stupid! It is not realistic to think you will get all of the votes in any election. So let's just write off all of the racist and go forth and win in November. Barack Obama is the best MAN for job! Obama 08!,
get a grip! Hillary has won the votes of people that would never lay down their bias and elect a black man...
==========
OMG, you are SOOOO deluded. It is B L A C K S who are voting based on RACE and whites who are voting based on QUALIFICATIONS.
Why was he able to win white voters back in February but not since March? HIS CAMPAIGN TANKED AND VOTERS LEFT HIM.....except BLACK voters that is.
The constant WHINING about racisim is SUCH a turn off and will blow up in your faces come fall.....
I am 34, college educated and grew up in urban city......you really think there are THAT many DEMOCRATS that are racist? Then you are TOAST in the general when the Repugs come out....
"It is B L A C K S who are voting based on RACE and whites who are voting based on QUALIFICATIONS."
You're comment is disturbing on a number of levels. White voters have admitted to anti-black racism. Have you missed that?
Northeast73 wrote:
"I am 34, college educated and grew up in urban city."
If this is true, you need to get your money back. It seems this is not the first time that you were played. On the other hand, you seem to be brighter than the dimwitted folks in WV whose prejudices have lasted longer than their usefulness.
We are ONE.
"It is B L A C K S who are voting based on RACE and whites who are voting based on QUALIFICATIONS."
That's quite the bigoted statement. Small wonder why people are accusing you of racism.
"Then you are TOAST in the general when the Repugs come out...."
Why? Because racist "democrats" will allow their fear of a black man to trump all their other concerns about important issues, like taxes, the war, the economy, or the environment, and join together with knuckle-dragging republicans to vote against their own interests AGAIN?
The Republicans can manufacture dozens of "scandals" with more bite than the Rev. Wright fiasco if Hillary is the nominee (and the corporate media will dutifully pick up the storyline as they always have). They have so much material to work with, and they are busy boys and girls. Just a sample: radical Hillary at Wellesley, Yale law Hillary working for communist law firm in SF, Hillary too good to bake cookies or take her husband's name, Hillary defending rapist against 12 year old, "pro-labor" Hillary on Wal-Mart board and central figure in anti-labor DLC, Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica, allegations of rape, Vince Foster, meaning of "is," Eleanor Roosevelt seance in WH, Marc Rich, Peter Paul, Kazakhstan dictator and Giustra and other Bill donors, Norman Hsu, peace in N. Ireland-SCHIP-Bosnia lies, for Iraq war before against it, Bill jetsetting with billionaires and models, rumors about Bill affairs and about Hillary lesbian affairs... Don't be so naive.
LIES? Those are not scandals. You cant deny that Obamas performances have TANKED since all this broke.....with every voting bloc EXCEPT AA's....
Dragging up a bunch of debunked rumors about HRC wouldnt work either.
"Dragging up a bunch of debunked rumors about HRC wouldnt work either."
Doesn't seem like it's been tried in this campaign yet. I'd have to say I mostly agree with you, because it hasn't worked against Obama. Then again, Hillary's negatives are higher, and there is just so much more material to work with, that it stands to reason that more crap would stick to her than would stick to Obama.
The point is that the right-wing echo chamber can take any one, or any dozen, of the listed issues and manufacture a "scandal," even if completely rehashed, and even if baseless (note Gore never said he invented the Internet and Kerry was the one in Vietnam, not Bush), and the corporate media with Wright and certainly in 2004 and 2000 showed no hesitation in running with such Republican-manufactured "scandals." Thecorporate media always helps the Republicans turn molehills into mountains and Hillary has an awful lot of molehills that the Republican propagandists have been salivating over for quite some time.
And Obama has not tanked among well-educated progressives, only really among the poorly educated whites.
Stop telling her what to say.......
She needs to make no speech on race.
Loony Obama supporters and the media need to accept something.
Obama has not won more than 40% of the white vote since Wisconsin BECAUSE HE IS A BAD CANDIDATE.
The only reason this is reflected in "white" voters is because black voters will continue to vote for him NO MATTER WHAT.
Why is it nobody called California racist when Obama lost the white vote there? Or in NJ? Or MA? Or NY?
Hillary should perhaps speak about both race and gender. However, your willingness to lay the blame for the racialization of the campaign squarely at the feet of the Clintons ignores reality.
While Obama did offer a compelling speech on issues of race in America, it was done strictly for his own political expediency and not some compelling recognition on his part that these issues needed to be addressed as an intrinsic part of a campaign for the nomination for the Presidency. A fundamental premise of his entire campaign has been to purposely diminish Obama's race identification and as such he has couched needs of the black community as economic and class struggles and not reflected struggles bound by race. This has been an effective strategy but not his only strategy.
Obama had his surrogates purposely spin rather innocuous statements made by the candidate Clinton or her surrogates, with clear racist intent. (see "Read Obama Campaign Memo Politicizing Of Race" -Huffpost) In so doing the historic ties between the black community and the Clintons was shattered. In South Carolina, before this surreptitious strategy was put into force, the polls split black support equally between Clinton and Obama. Every opportunity to damage the reputation of the Clintons was taken and the innevitable result has been a 90% black support of Obama countered by a diminishing support amongst the white vote, a vote which will be critical in the general election. This self-inflicted wound is troublesome.
This is something that never occurred to me until I read your post, and I think that it is a fabulous idea. Truly great human beings are those who use their moments of defeat to change course and become better and stronger people. I am hopeful that Hillary will take this opportunity. There are many including me who believe that much of what Hillary Clinton has done in the past weeks has been designed to weaken Obama and prepare the way for her run in 2012. I would love for her to prove me and the other doubters wrong by devoting herself to making sure that we elect a Democrat in November so that we can begin the process of getting our country back on track. If she was able to move even further by taking a leadership role in a real conversation about both racism and sexism and how we can all do better she will have emerged from this process in a heroic fashion. The country will be better for it and so will she. An important thing for her to remember going forward is that the list of those whom we revere as great Americans is in no way limited to the 43 who have served in the office of president. What Hillary does next matters greatly to her legacy.
It is rare for me to disagree significantly with Jim Zogby, especially regarding political matters within the U.S.
It is still more rare for me to take issue with Mr. Zogby's FACTS, even if I may draw different conclusions from them.
Mr. Zogby has come very close to DELIBERATELY misstating the facts of what occured in the weeks surrounding the South Carolina primary.....something I would have never thought possible.
Like Sen.s Biden, Dodd, Edwards & Clinton, Gov. Richardson, and Rep. Kuccinich;......Sen. Obama is a fine candidate, and I believe he will make a fine President should he be the Democratic nominee (as now seems likely) and is able to defeat Sen. McCain in the general election (somewhat less certain, but still very possible).
The APPALLING fact that millions of Americans have been led to believe that two of our country's great leaders; Sen. and President Clinton; are some kind of crypto-racists will leave a bad taste in my mouth for sometime to come.
Obama will have my vote, but not my enthusiasm.
I feel much as I did after McGovern's defeat and Nixon's resignation....dissillusioned by...and disassociated from the whole stinking tawdry mess.
It's hard to imagine being particularly inspired by Obama or anyone else in the future, and easy to see why MY preference; Al Gore ; considered it the better part of wisdom not to submit himself to this disgusting process. Regards......................................................................................tm
I think it would be about as helpful as Obama giving a speech on sexism...
You really don't get it. Do you?
I guess I don't. It probably wouldn't hurt, I just really don't get how effective she would be on that.
I think if anything, she needs to talk to her supporters about sexism, because they're all rallying and crying sexism as the reason Hillary didn't win and threatening to vote McCain if they don't get their way. I'm a woman, and to me that's completely ridiculous. They seem to think they'd be doing Hillary a favor by sabotaging Obama, and she really needs to address that and them if she doesn't want to be seen as trying to damage him and the party.
Has Obama said things that could be interpreted as sexist?
No, not that I'm aware of...I guess my only point was that I don't think it would accomplish much for her to do that.
you don't get it, James. we just want Hillary to disappear. To just go. We want to thank her for doing all the vetting and smearing she could so as to give our guy Barack, some practice and so on. But now, Hillary, just go. Away.
No. We don't want Hillary to go away. We want her to be a leader and help spur this nation forward. Regardless of what you think of her, she is still a leader for a huge constituency and her leadership will help determine what those people think about the future of America. We have a real problem here and Hillary can help. Yes Barack has the skills to address it but Hillary's leadership on this issue would be invaluable. I agree with Mr. Zogby here.
Mr. Zogby:
Hillary must not make a speech on race! As you are aware from your polling Americans do not find Hillary trustworthy or very honest, race is such an important issue that it should be addressed by someone who can be trusted and by someone who is perceived as honest. Otherwise the speech will be seen as pandering.
I disagree. It will not be seen as pandering if she makes the speech on race as her final concession on the nomination. Even if she made the speech today, look at the remaining states, who would she be pandering to? It's about her legacy. She needs to come out clear on this topic. Maybe along with Bill, as they make their endorsement of Barack Obama for President of the US.
I agree. Providing a platform for her is asking for more gutter treachery. She needs to go and fast.
When fairy tale is taken a a racist statement,that tells you how badly they wanted to take Hillary down.
Keep your blinders on my friend.
I agree with the poster. Hillary Clinton can, and must, make this speech. She should do it for the sake of her own political career and reputation, if nothing else. Bill Clinton's political success was built on African-American votes. Without AA voters, he'd never have been elected Arkansas Attorney General, Arkansas Governor, or president of the United States. And if Bill hadn't had the political career he's had, Hillary wouldn't have one now. For the Clintons to fall back on racism as an argument for why Hillary should be nominated is a betrayal of the people who made them who they are.
The Clintons used to understand how corrosive racism is. Bill promised the national conversation on race, although it never really got off the ground the way he seems to have intended. So there's no reason Hillary couldn't give a speech on race. Whether she will is another matter entirely.
Another speech on race isn't going to change anything. Frankly I've heard enough about race and would rather have action behind the flowery words.
Blacks have turned against her in favor of the black candidate. Why should she make a speech on race?
When HRC began her bid for the presidency she had the majority (about 60%) of the African American vote. Then she and her husband became desperate after a few losses and began injecting race in their campaign by trivializing, thus disrespecting, Obama's candidacy. This slowly eroded support from African Americans. I'm not sure, however, how much good it would do for her to give a speech. Her credibility is questionable at this stage. Besides, she's done enough damage.
Black support shifted when he became a viable candidate after the Iowa win even though he has not campaigned, raised money in support of many black elected officials across the country. Blacks had already abandoned Mrs. Clinton and showed no loyalty in their support in the community. They eagerly embraced that the Clintons were racists and the tangible proof of their efforts did not matter.
Only Obama supporters believe it is racist or disparaging to compare his South Carolina win to Jesse Jackson's win......i.e. comparing one black to another.
"Only Obama supporters believe it is racist or disparaging to compare his South Carolina win to Jesse Jackson's win......i.e. comparing one black to another."
I would suggest that you try making that statement to a random sampling of African-Americans and see what kind of response you get.
Because she drove them to it, and her legacy will be that of a 21st Century race-baiting politician. But you can't see this, because her comments and those of her supporters didn't effect you. Very self-centered vision you have.
feelfree sounds like you lost one your K's. Man you guys still control the culture of country, I mean you really act as if AA are deciding this vote. Hillary had the African American Vote and she lost it. Why because she started doing exactly what she is doing now. How could she go to the largest African American churches an win the support of influential AA, then turn around and pander to racist whites. She needs to address this. It's what leader does when they see their followers moving against their beliefes. Not if these are her beliefs that so be it. Really... FeeFree Sounds to me like your panties are in a knout.
I find it rather sad that you assume that I'm a member of the KKK because I simply stated the truth about black support for Obama. As politics go groups make their political beds and blacks have chosen the black candidate. You can spin it anyway you want to spin it, but that is the truth.
Why ask someone blacks DON'T support to make a speech on race?
The Democratic Party will no longer be the party that supports civil rights once they choose the candidate that "transcends race" or who is the "post racial" candidate. Civil rights activists such as Jesse Jackson, Andrew Young and hundreds of others became persona non grata to the Obama campaign.
My question to you is.... how could a group of people turn their backs on the Clintons who have worked tirelessly to help blacks get elected in this country and WIN and EARN support of influential blacks and then have the majority of blacks turn their backs on them AND call them racists?
Why should she pander to people who won't vote for her?
Why pander to people who imply, state, or believe the Clintons are racists?
"Why should she pander to people who won't vote for her? "
Same reason Obama needs to pander to imbeciles like yourself:
"United, We Stand; Divided, We Fall".
Posted May 14, 2008 | 05:12 PM (EST)