Driving A Wedge

The Drudge Report is a right-wing site that is used to drive right-wing propaganda into the large, corporate media outlets. When a story is featured at the Drudge Report, you always have to ask why, and ask what is the right's intent behind getting this story into circulation.

Today Drudge points us to a story, Wilder Still Sore Over Clinton Comment. This story is obviously an effort to drive a wedge between supporters of Senators Obama and Clinton. It uses out-of-context, incomplete quotes and mischaracterizes the intent and meaning of the quotes to drive up tensions.

The nation's first elected black governor said Saturday he is not ready to excuse comments former President Bill Clinton made about Barack Obama.

In campaigning for his wife last month on the eve of the New Hampshire primary, Clinton called Obama's opposition to the Iraq war "a fairy tale." Clinton suggested Obama had toned down his early anti-war fervor during his 2004 Senate campaign.

. . . Clinton also implied that an Obama victory in South Carolina would amount to a reward based on race, like the Rev. Jesse Jackson's 20 years earlier.

Wilder said the former president's comments stung him and other black voters and diminished their respect for Clinton.

"It's not just me (who) feels that; any number of people feel that," Wilder said. "A time comes and a time goes. The president has had his time."

This is propaganda at its best.

Readers know that I do not favor one candidate over the other. I think they are both great candidates who would make excellent presidents, but neither offers the transformational, progressive change I believe would most benefit the country and world. I defend BOTH of them from attacks -- and wish they would defend each other and us from attacks.

This is an attack. It is an obvious attempt to split the Democratic Party and its supporters, going into the elections. Duh!

Are you going to let them play you like a fiddle? Keep in mind who the enemy is here. The stakes are high: If we let the primary contest divide us how many hundred thousand Iraqis or Iranians will be killed before the 2012 elections, how much more will corporations take over our democracy, how much more concentration of wealth at the top will we see? Please do not be fooled by this stuff! If it appears at DRUDGE, you KNOW something is going on.

Follow Dave Johnson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dcjohnson

Comments

[drblack]

Drudge is like Fox...propaganda of the Right wing.
Ignore it.

[Dave Johnson - Huffpost Blogger]

That is what I am asking readers to do.

[CanSoc]

Wise words, sir! As a foreigner it has given me the best picture yet of the internecine squabbling between the Clintonistas and the Obamaniacs.

[nunzia]

Dave Johnson - Thank you so much for this sensible blog.
Too many people at this site are drinking the Drudge koolaid.
Once again the left wing is doing what it does best, forming the circular firing squad.
What a bunch of dumb, dumb, dumb self-destructive idealogues.
Their candidates have so little difference between them, in terms of policy, yet the supporters of each are letting the reichwing do what it always does: divide and conquer.
Idiots.

[lynnn]

Excuse me. Was the Drudge report okay when the HRC campaign paid him to push the false Muslim story? (Remember that was earlier this year). Come one it's not that hard to google and find a story.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/hillaryclinton/story/0,,2197220,00.html

[Dave Johnson - Huffpost Blogger]

This is a very good example of what I am talking about. This is just false, never happened. A baseless charge, that divides Democrats and serves the right.

[bbebop]

whether or not drudge is trying to divide, i tend to agree with wilder's comments and frank rich's nyt column this morning. the clinton campaign has been racially divisive and offensive.

[readerK]

bbebop:It was Wilder's comments that were racially divisive. Wilder said:"Barack Obama is not a fairy tale. He is real." But Bill Clinton NEVER talked about Obama the human entity as "a fairy tale;" he described Obama's stances on the Iraq war as "a fairy tale." Why Wilder, other black leaders and the black community insist on falsely accusing Clinton of calling Barack "a fairy tale" is beyond me.

I think what Bill said is being deliberately misinterpreted so that it will serve as the excuse for the massive desertion of black voters from Hillary.

Through zillions of TV replays of what Clinton actually said, how on earth could Wilder and others have concluded that it was Obama, not his Iraq policies, that was described as the fairy tale? It is sad that folks can be so cynical. readerK.

[ATLiberal]

It depends on what the meaning of is is. Right?

Oh brother. Another 8 years??

[nunzia]

readerK - you're absolutely right. But,the Obama cultists here are beyond reason.
Let's just hope they don't end up giving the next election to the Rs.

[Democrab]

Whites 50/50 and AAs 85 15. Hmm.

[ncvoter]

Clearly alot of people were offended, as seen by the shift in voting patterns, and it wasn't because some ridiculous talking head pundit swayed them.

Bill has to own his words. Thats just the way it is.

[RichLiberal]

This is what I call Obama's reverse race-baiting. Basically, anytime anyone mentions anything having to do with race, out come the Obama people insinuating the Clintons are racists and poor Obama is "once again" victimized by racism.

It is this aspect of the Obama campaign that has led many Clinton supporters to question his very worthiness to be a representative of the Democratic party.

Obama's basic premise is that if you are white then you cannot mention race. i.e. the fact that Obama has raised Afro-American voting totals and that the vote is going 80-90% his way, and that the 2 candidates are so close on so many "issues", makes it obvious that this Afro-American vote is race-based and not an objective review of the candidates' capabilities. Again, that is their right to vote as they choose. But to then claim that the Clintons are playing the race card is the height of hypocrisy.

In my years of experience, Obama is developing into the most divisive candidate the Democratic party has ever seen. The fact that the Democratic leadership is backing this is very troubling as to the long term future of the party.

[BitJam]

Please don't let the facts get in the way of your spin.

http://cdn.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/18/MNSNUH7GC.DTL

~~~~~~~~~~­~~~~~~~~~~

On the issue of race, Obama also said key differences in outlook and experience define the two campaigns.

"I actually don't think that the comment that Sen. Clinton made about Dr. King was a racial comment," he said, referring to a recent flareup in which she noted that President Lyndon Johnson had pushed the 1964 Civil Rights Act through Congress, a comment that some African American leaders took as downplaying contributions of Dr. Martin Luther King.

"I think it was illustrative of how she thinks change happens," he said. "She was arguing that Lyndon Johnson, his skill set was what was critical to getting the Civil Rights Act done - as opposed to a movement on the streets. And that indicates a difference in emphasis on how change occurs. But I don't think the comments were racial."

~~~~~~~~~~­~~~~~~~~~~

[ATLiberal]

Just look at all the victories that Obama's race-based campaign has amassed:

Iowa
Missouri
Connecticut
Delaware
Kansas
Nebraska
Washington
Minnesota
Colorado
Utah
Alaska
North Dakota
Idaho

Yes, the black vote is destroying the country.
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!!
What a race-baiting joke your post is.

[Tsunami]

Absolutely!! Obama IS the race card. As soon as Obama is nominated, the Repugs will do the vetting and Obama will fade because he is full of Rhetoric and short on Reality. Sen Clinton is a Realistic WIN.

[BitJam]

It's not just Drudge.

There are plenty of comments here on HuffPo pretending to be from supporters of either Clinton or Obama but are actually intended to divide us.

We should all criticize (and perhaps flag) nasty comments especially when they seem to be in favor of the candidate we support.

[kempis]

I think that's a good suggestion. I think Clinton would make the better president, but I'll support Obama if he's the nominee (and increasingly it looks like he will be).

However, I'm beyond fed up with the demonizing of Hillary Clinton by people in her own party. It was bad enough when the rightwing did it. The zealousness with which some of Obama's supporters attack her is making it harder for me to vote for Obama--even though rationally I know it's what I should do if he's the nominee.

I'm also embarrassed by those wacko Hillary supporters who belittle Obama. And I'm sure those remarks only further alienate Obama supporters from the Hillary camp.

This is why I want this nomination decided as soon as possible--hopefully by March 4. Otherwise, half the party will be so pissed off at the nominee that they will either sit home on election day or vote for McCain. I fear that degree of alienation has already happened to more than a few.

[TXfemmom]

Clinton and Obama need to stop insulting and dividing the electorate within the Democratic Party and concentrate like hell on McCain and Huckabee and the Bush legacy, which is a disaster.

There must be a Democratic President elected and either of the candidates are way better than the alternative. Do African Americans think that they should slit the throats of fellow Democrats because they see some sort of racism within the party. WELL, THEY SHOULD TRY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. The African-American community has been savaged by the Bush administration and the Republican­-controlle­d Congress predating Bush and during the Bush administration.

As for Clinton, she needs to concentrate on attacking McCain and Huckabee and the Republicans, as well. The Democrats, and the Clinton campaign, need to refocus on the enemy...and that IS THE REPUBLICANS AND THEIR PARTY.

From the beginning of this campaign cycle, I have reiterated and screamed at all sides within the Democratic Party to FOCUS ON THE PUKES, AND I DID NOT WANT TO SEE DEMOCRATIC BLOOD IN THE WATER, BUT THAT IS HAPPENING.

We need to close ranks and both candidates need to make it fully and completely known that the other will support whomever the candidate is, and FOCUS ON THE PUKES.

[oldpotsmuggler]

"The African-American community has been savaged by the Bush administration" Almost too obvious to need mentioning, but then you look around and see so many who don't seem to understand just how badly we've all been savaged by BUSHCO. And it blows my mind that they also don't seem to understand that the master plan being followed by the "oil wing" of the Republican Party has things in store for us that will make the last eight years look like a picnic.

Folks, the really big money has already been diversified so far across the globe (and that's not all negative, but the positive aspects need to wait for a different subject) that they no longer even need to do well in the U.S. to keep their gravy train chugging on track. Give them a way to steal our wealth and sell our blood off for even more and it would be a done deal in a heartbeat. Their main strategy now is to weaken the Democrats on our way to the Whitehouse this year so thet they can hold as much ground as possible before they get it back in four or eight years. And then, oh baby, what they're ready, able, and willing to unleash!!!

[bspoons]

Condi Rice, next Vice-Presidential candidate?

[bspoons]

We're being played like fiddles either way; I'm disgusted with Democrats just slightly less than Republicans. I am a progressive and see no Left left. This is a good thing to point out crud like this though. Thanks.

[mommadona]

#1 - Who in their right mind reads Drudge?

#2 - Lot of people considered Clinton's remarks as veiled racism in that "good ol' boy" kinda way of patronizing "Daddy Knows Best" way. (It's a Southern thing, what can you say.....prove me wrong)

#3 - I'm not overly jazzed about the selections (I'm an Independent), but I know ONE of the candidates is after this little prize for one reason: PERSONAL BENEFIT AND FORTUNE...won't even mention the fact of the DLC..nope...won't go THERE.

#4 - If you look around at this very moment, the Democratic Party couldn't be MORE divided.

It is DLC versus DNC.

Herding Cats #111:

Alpha Cat look really really silly when the kittens start playing with it's tail.

[clevelandchick]

Many Democrats are very upset with the Clintons regarding their early campaign style against Obama:

1.) Bob Kerrey calling Obama a Muslim
2.) Cuomo's 'shuck & jive' comment
3.) BET Founder Robert Johnson's implication that Obama is a drug dealer?! Come on!
4.) The whole Rezko controversy - dozens of Democrats have taken campaign contributions from Rezko - including Bill Clinton for his POTUS races in the 90s. The height of hypocrisy for the Clintons.
5.) Clinton implying in NH that if Obama's in office the terrorists will get us.
6.) That the civil rights movement owes it's success to whites like LBJ. Racist revisionist history. LBJ's hand was forced by the movement, he was hardly a civil rights activist.

I met several Democratic leaders of my city at an Obama event weeks ago, most of them white, who said the Clintons really pissed them off.

Nobody put words in the mouths of the Clintons and their surrogates. That was their campaign style - very Rovian. They were the first to use the 'wedge' and it backfired on them. They can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[Dave Johnson - Huffpost Blogger]

1,2,3,4 and 6 have nothing to do with "the Clintons" and 5 never happened.

This is an example of what I am talking about.

[not one of the sheep]

Marcella Bombadieril reported on Jan.7 2008 from Dover NH, Hillary Clinton stating: "I don't think it was an accident Al Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister. They watch our elections as closely as we do, maybe more closely than some of our citizens do. Let's not forget you're hiring a president not to just do what a candidate says during an election, you want a president to be there when the chips are down." Obviously there is no implication that Obama is incompetent when dealing with terrorists. On what planet?

[lynnn]

You are good @ snarking man you had me for a moment.

[lynnn]

You are good @ snarking.

[SDnavyPROUD]

1, 2, 3, & 6 had everything to do with Clintons: they were either on the Clinton campaign or an answer to a question regarding the two candidates(#2),and #5 and 6 were the Clintons showing an agenda that power is kept within established figures.
Whatever merits you argument put forth in the article, its now reduced in credibility to me, since you seem inclined to ignore the plain facts which we have all observed.

[Dap]

Dear Dave,

Been a while since I've dropped in on ya, I must say this is a spot-on report, thanks for bringing it to point. Kudos!
Agape.

[Novaseeker]

Drudge hates the Clinton's without doubt. But the tinfoil hat routine is unwarranted. Thinking republicans are organizing to vote for Hillary in open primaries (like Va) because they think that this helps the GOP. I'm not making this up -- I am an independent, but I know people who are involved in the GOP machine here and they are organizing their people to vote for Hillary here on Tuesday because they want her to win the democratic nomination. If there's a tinfoil hat here, it belongs to the Republicans who will be voting in open primaries to get the opponent they prefer to face.

[trevor01]

Republicans who want to see Hillary in the race will be sorry. Rich's hatchet job in the Times notwithstanding, Americans appreciate and understand the need for machiavellian maneuvering in these contests and in their leadership, as well they should.

[illinoisan]

Jeez, if you think BOTH of them are great candidates who would make excellent presidents but that NEITHER of them offer transformational, progressive change, then you simply haven't done your homework.

If your criteria are 1) great candidate, 2) excellent president, 3) transformational, and 4) progressive, then there is only one candidate worthy of your support.

I don't even have to say who that candidate is, it's so freakin' obvious.

[illinoisan]

Also, you might add another useful criteria: 5) isn't loathed by half of the American people.

[Countess]

There are many democrats who are repelled by the Clintons campaign and they do not need drudge or anyone else to point this out. Read Frank Rich who is a liberal democrat and is disgusted by their tactics.

[Dave Johnson - Huffpost Blogger]

Since you brought up Frank Rich, I read his column and am curious why he used "the black candidate" in quotes, and attributed it to the Clintons, but when you follow the link he uses as a citation there is no such quote from any Clinton. Only from anonymous sources in an AP report.

This is an example of my point. The AP will be doing this to Obama as well, if he is the nominee. It might be a good idea for Obama to be cultivating allies instead of making enemies.