The Biggest Victim

On TPM, Greg Sargent says that Obama is "Winning Spin War Over Who's Victim."

I think this is right. Lately Obama is almost a poster child for the wronged. What is the biggest sin of the terrible Clinton attack machine? The suggestion that Obama said he likes Reagan? That Obama's anti-war record is exaggerated? Voting "present" in the Illinois State Senate? Ouch. Wow, this is "so unfair!." The Wal-Mart Rezko exchange, that began with Wal-Mart?

I'm sure I''m missing something here. But none of this strikes me as remotely rough stuff, compared to, for example, the relentless attacks on both Hillary as a candidate, and the savage portrayal of the last Democratic administration, not to mention that relatively mild but absurd suggestion that Hillary doesn't respect the achievements of Martin Luther King. Tonight on MSNBC Chris Mathews is claiming that "the Clintons" are terrible for reminding South Carolina voters that Obama is black. Huh?

But why would one want so desperately to be portrayed as a victim? Is that what the voters are looking for? I guess that's one theory of what the Democratic primary voters like. Maybe it's what campaigns think impresses the reporting classes.

In some sense, this makes sense. The press covered the Hillary-as-victim story for awhile, and she seemed to benefit. And as she began to respond to the incoming attacks, the Obama-as-victim story was the next wave. But at some point, if the Obama candidacy fails, it won't be the first time a politician was not elected president. Ditto for Clinton candidacy.

I have as much liberal white male guilt as the next guy, but at some point, I'd like to see a little less whining.

Follow James Love on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jamie_love

Comments

[NYDamien]

Now, here's Obama's dilemma. The product he's selling prevents him from fighting back. I mean, his whole schtick is that he can "bring everybody together." The "old politics," of rancor and confrontation will melt away within the aura of......He.... He, who will show competing, and aggresive interests/­foes/enemi­es that by voluntarily slicing off about one half of their accumuulated strength and wealth, and tossing it onto a communal pile, therby rendering everyone equal. Now, when everyone's equal, aggressive behavour disappears, harmony rushes in to fill the vacuum, At a precise, predetermined moment, all factions clasp hands and humm.....om.....om
When at peace, Obama will lead them into a joyful place where everyone "does the right thing." HMO'S adopt a policyof 100% approvals. Syria tells Israellis in the Golan Heights, "Smack, what was I thinking? Who needs that fore-kaka-nah piece of dirt anyway? Boychick, you want it? You got it! Catchya later, neighbor........you got the picture. His thing is, that he says he can actually get that done. That his ability to draw upon never before seen powers of persuasion, that he alone has, as opposed to Hillary, who, of course has none.
His frustration is, that nobody's playing fair. He keeps shining his halo...... big bad billie-n-the bitch keep smackin him in the face. If he fights back, it would be an admission his way doesn't work. I think Clinton, as a surrogate, is showing everyone, "this could be Putin, then what?
If he blows his cool and fights, then he's just another politician. If he doesn't, and all his surrogates whine their faces off, he looks like a sissy,
Tough spot, Obama baby

[altohone]

Nice spin.

Seriously flawed, but nice.


Your kind that thinks blatant lying by the Clintons isn't a sin may need professional help.

If you want ANOTHER liar as president, and you think that Democrats can win without the votes of people who won't support a liar, keep cheering for the Clintons.

[dawlishgal]

All I keep hearing from the Clintons is that they are merely doing what was done to them over the years. Not that OBAMA did it...they just feel entitled to slime somebody, anybody else who interferes with what they believe is their destiny for 8 more years in the White House.

Some people believe that 8 more years of a disfunctional couple, one that operates via one humiliating the other in public REPEATEDLY and apparently with her permission, is not a healthy kind of leadership, especially at a perilous time in the history of our country.

No matter how competent a leader may be, is it necessary for us to choose one with a permanent built-in, family-grown potential for DISTRACTION from the inportant job of governing?

Who, exactly, is portraying themselves as the "victims" here? Sounds to me as though it is the Clintons.

[AnninCA]

Well, I think the best perspective comes from the NY TIMES. They applaud his effort but note that he isn't yet able to really deliver on content and knowledge. Hillary is, indeed, formidible. She earned that, too. You can't be as knowledgeable and forceful as her without having gotten down into all of the real issues for a long time and figured out what will and will not work. Her clarity is evidence.

So what's really left for Obama?

Apparently, the victim card.

[Nutcase]

It's the electorate that is the victim of both of them and of the MSM.

cognito ergo populistae

[Manicsuperstar]

Can just imagine how tedious it will be if Obama gets the nomination and then spends the months until November whining about how the mean old Republicans are attacking him unfairly, like he's done with Bill Clinton's remarks this past week? He's gotten used to getting a free ride from the media and has been duped into believing the nomination was going to be handed to him on a silver platter. He's going to have to grow a backbone if he expects to go much further. The attacks leveled against him by the Clinton campaign have been perfectly reasonable, and mild compared to what the Democratic nominee will have to endure from the Republicans, yet his reactions to those attacks have been shrill at best, and made him look like a big, self-pitying wuss. Frankly, I think it's already over for him. He will win SC, but only because of the black vote, and by a much smaller margin than people now expect. It will be his last significant win. The tide has already turned against him, even though he doesn't know it yet. Even bleeding heart liberals won't vote for somebody who plays the victim. It's weak and it's a losing strategy.

[jcar]

I'd like to see an honestly run campaign (on Clinton's part).

What we are seeing is the Bil & Hill show, and it ain't pretty.

Hillary doesn't look so presidential with her hubby ex-president doing all the heavy lifting.

[TommyMcCarthy]

A TRUE PARABLE Part Two

Jubu was (in the vernacular of those days in NY) my "main man"... like a brother really....and he drove even ME crazy with this "calling it" stuff.

One day..I went off on 'Bu.... saying something to the effect of "If you can't play on your home court, with your HOME BOYS, without alla' time cryin' and threataning to quit......what are you gonna'do at Syracuse....or the NBA where you SAY you wanna' go?


Well, if I was tight with Sen. Obama I'd say something similar to him.

Obama's got talent, charisma, the right moves.....­everything he needs to be a winner at THIS game. Why not just PLAY without all the time saying "I got it", pointing fingers, having SPECTATORS call your fouls for you?

Lord knows, we've seen Sen. Clinton get fouled....­HAMMERED..­..flat on the deck....and come up BLOODY.... saying..... "Gimme the Ball...Let's Play"....for going on twenty years now.

I often hear the question asked If Obama can't take THIS how's he going to handle the Republicans?

I'll go one better than that. After all, he aspires to be the President, doesen't he?
Hows he going to handle the Russians, or the Chineese.....not to mention the Bond Traders, or the health insurance lobby?
THOSE guys don't even BELIEVE in fouls.
They're plying something more like hockey, or maybe Ultimate Fighting Challenge.

Oh yeah, and quit makin' it NOT SO FUN. regards...­..........­..........­.........t­m

[fitCTmom]

I am a registered Democrat and have voted as such in every single election from Town Council to POTUS (except for 2 on the local level) for the past 20 years. But, there has been a shift. I don't know when it started, but it seems as a whole the Progressives of the Democratic Party have become the party of "victims". "They charged us too much for our mortgage", "The CEOs make too much money" "The MSM is tricking us". Though the analogy of Obama playing the victim card is wrong and filled with the writers own opinions which have been colored by loyalty, it is funny to hear a Progressive complain about the "victim card". It's getting a little old listening to people complain that their lot in life is the government, MSM, Big-Bad Corporations fault...etc. CAN NO ONE TAKE RESPONSIBILTY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS ANYMORE? Can no one say "ya know, I think I'll turn off the tv, they seem biased" "hey, I don't think I'll sign this loan, the terms suck" "Sweetie, I think I'll go back to school, I hate my job." No, there is always someone else to blame. VICTIM CARD, indeed.

[TommyMcCarthy]

A TRUE PARABLE: (in two parts)

When I was a kid my best friend Julius and I spent about 50% of our time playing pick-up basketball in our local playground.

In those days, fouls were on the honor system. If you were fouled while shooting, you would say..."I got it".....at which point (subject to sometimes FIERCE debate) you'd get the ball back and start your play over (no foul shots... (boring/wimpy!)

If you were fouled while trying a shot there was NO WAY you were going to make anyway,.... it was considered extra-wussy to "call it"...hence "no harm no foul". (said derisively, like "ain't you a wimp"!)

We all had some game ...,but JUBU?.... even at 10, 11, 12 years old....he had TALENT....quick, smart and he could SKY. In those (pre-Jordan, pre-Magic) days, he acquired the nickname "Dr. J" (after everyone's hero Julius Erving)....mostly because of the amazing moves he could pull off, in traffic,...and somehow "get a roll" and have the ball go in.

Sometimes kids from other courts would stop thier games and watch OURS (obviously the best game goin'!)...­.sometimes passers-by would watch for awhile...sometimes even (gulp!) GIRLS!

Well, we're little kids here.... and some of this went to Jubu's head. After awhile, WHATEVER kinda' junk he put up.....if it didn't go in he'd call a foul. Sometimes it got to where SPECTATORS....I mean people not even from our NEIGHBORHO­OD...would be saying "AWW now he's GOT that!" ...calling fouls FOR him...when some crazy-ass shot of Jubu's didn't drop!!!

Suffice it to say, it got to be NOT SO FUN to have 'Bu in our games anymore......you couldn't even PLAY without him calling a foul.....it was always a bunch of arguing, ....often a fight.....it could NEVER be JUBU's fault (even though it often was.....)....and you could never FINISH a game without SOMEBODY (usualy 'Bu) stalking off and saying "I ain't PLAYIN' in this park no more!!"

Anybody see where I'm going here?

[tbone99]

Obama can only lose acting the victim, tho' I suppose it may win over black voters , who actually have been the losers over the years and will identify, and perhaps play to white guilt. If it goes to racial tho' it will lose many white voters. A contest is exactly that - a time to challenge your opponent -besides this ain't nuthin yet- wait for the Repugs,

However, the real victim has been Edwards , who has been consistently shut out by the MSM , despite running the race with a small percentage of the cash , no corporate$ and having more delegates than most the Repugs who still are featured prominently in Huffpo.

Thanks John Edwards for your perserverance in bringing economic injustice into the campaign from Day #1 , starting out in New Orleans and continuing to fight the good fight for those upon whose backs the corporate profiteers stand on!

[Noracharles1995]

Jamie, time to overcome the white male guilt. Your pals Nader and Michael Moore have all but endorsed, you got it, the white guy John Edwards. The one candidate who isn't bickering with anybody, except on the issues as it should be.

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

There are certain terms or phrases of water-cooler discourse which we use so frequently they have lost all meaning: "playing the race card," "politically correct," "multicultural" and "victim" being the first four that come to mind.

Somehow *being* the victim has become a bad thing in America-- even if you don't say you are, just hint a little at it, you're pounced on for "playing the victim" and "whining." It doesn't matter whether you actually are or not, if you suggest even the tiniest bit you're a victim, watch out. And never mind if you stand up for yourself in a calm way or provide evidence of how you were wronged-- how dare you get bent out of shape and accuse anyone of something so bad!

Maybe this is why Dr. Phil has his own TV show.

Anyway, just so nobody is playing victim I think we should be more troubled by the person who is going up against a powerful political machine that will say anything to win than the political machine itself. It's like all those Bush-haters since 2001 whining about two stolen elections and a war that spineless Democrats supported.

There's always Canada, so take some "personal responsibility" and move to a country where leaders aren't chosen according to alternating last names (Jeb you're up next).

And of course when it comes to African Americans, if you throw the "victim" word out there that doesn't carry any extra meaning. No need to be careful about that. "I'm sorry if a cop pulled you over after someone-- maybe white, maybe black-- robbed the the liquor store down the street-- but don't play victim when we're trying to catch criminals!"

(Somehow this post went from sincere to sarcastic.)

Bottom line: never complain about any smears made against you, any lack of balance in coverage (though it's OK Bill if you do because you won two presidental elections), and apparently if you're an African American, be especially careful about defending your record and reputation on TV, because here comes that old "victim" word again.

[Kreskytim]

To paraphrase Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men, " you want her on that wall, you need her on that wall".

The Clintons are only giving us a preview of what the right will do. Bill and Hill have done the Dems a favor. They've only hinted around the edges of the race card and look what happened. It's like we've been standing in a pool of gasoline and pretending that it's not there. One spark is all it took.

Nobody has taken more misogynistic crap from the right than Hillary Rodham Clinton. Decades of it. For us.
The idea that Barack Obama was going to glide in and win the election and NEVER have to deal with the racism in this country is unrealistic.
Come on, we all know it. We live in a racist and sexist society. The evdince is everywhere.
Look at what Hillary has had to deal with for 2 decades. I'm not going to list it. Just turn on Rush or Sean.

If I could have my way, I would wave my magic wand and end the in- fighting. If I could make them stop and form a ticket I would. Hillary/Obama '08

[bluestatelib]

James Love knows that you don't have to "go nuclear" to sink an opponent's candidacy with lies and distortions. Going nuclear has a high likelihood of backfiring. So the Clintons technique is to slime and smear Obama with a thousand little (and some big) lies and distortions in order to destroy his universal appeal and his message of hope and unity.

As a life-long Democrat, I've never seen these tactics used so shamefully in a Democratic primary. They are too reminiscent of the hardball Republican tactics that I thought most Democrats abhorred. So matter what may come, I will not be voting for Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee!

Furthemore, to suggest that Obama's attempting to garner sympathy because of his race, or is playing the victim because he's now responding to the Clintons lies and distortions, is truly bizarre to me. Obama knows that he can't win the nomination if people see him as a "black victim," thus his conscious message of "unity" and attempt to appeal to Independents and Republicans. The author of this article has used his race in an attempt to garner sympathy (i.e. "liberal white guilt") in a more overt way than Obama ever has.

So play these games Clinton supporters. These outright lies and false innuendo will come back in spades to sink Hillary's campaign if she wins the nomination. She has alienated the most loyal Democratic base, African Americans, Independents are not enthused about her and will more likely support McCain, and Republicans despise her with a deep passion and are preparing to destroy her. They'll use the Clintons sordid history starting with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. Every thing old will be new again!

They'll also come after her with new lies and distortions and uncovered inconvenient truths about the Clintons. When this happens, I don't want to see any of these Clinton supporters complaining about the despicable tactics of the Republicans. You reap what you sow.