Clinton Owes Obama An Apology

I've had it with the Clintons.

The past few months I've tried to defend Bill and Hillary Clinton against some of the more unreasonable attacks from their critics. Just last weekend on CNN's Ballot Bowl, I defended Bill Clinton when critics accused of him of questioning Barack Obama's patriotism. The critics may have misinterpreted Clinton's remarks, I said, giving the former president the benefit of the doubt.

I've also defended Barack Obama in recent weeks against unreasonable charges directed at him because of his association with his church and his pastor. It seems obvious to me that Barack Obama loves his country and is not an anti-white bigot.

Maybe I'm too close to the two Democrats to be against either one. I went to law school with Barack Obama and worked in the Clinton White House, so I have connections and allegiances to both candidates. That's why I've never understood the rabid Hillary haters or the angry Obama opponents. To me, all three candidates -- including John McCain -- are good and decent Americans who have served their country with distinction.

I wish Hillary Clinton would acknowledge that fact too. In the past few weeks, I've been increasingly disturbed by the gratuitously negative tone of the Clinton campaign.

First, during an interview with 60 Minutes host Steve Croft, Sen. Clinton cleverly stoked the rumors that Obama might be a closet Muslim. "No, there is nothing to base that on," she told Croft. But then she slyly added, "As far as I know."

Next, she all but endorsed McCain over Obama for president. "I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House," she said. "I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

Then came the Jeremiah Wright story. Based on the previous tactics used by her campaign, I did not expect Clinton to say much of anything about the Wright story. As Napoleon Bonaparte famously said, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." And after all, the Clintons have relied on the support of controversial black pastors, include Rev. Jeremiah Wright, to save their own hides several times in the past.

But as time went by, and the Wright story lingered on, it seemed Clinton was perfectly willing to let the uninformed public get the misimpression that Barack Obama is moonlighting as an anti-American black nationalist racist. She knows better, and she ought to be ashamed for not speaking up on his behalf.

Just last month, in one of the many near-death experiences that forced her into a moment of vulnerable humility, Senator Clinton told a debate audience in Austin, Texas that she was proud to sit beside Barack Obama. "No matter what happens in this contest -- and I am honored. I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored," she said to applause. For a moment, it seemed the Democratic contest might become civil but competitive. For a moment.

Then on Tuesday of this week, apparently dissatisfied that the Jeremiah Wright story had failed to derail Obama's campaign, Clinton broke her silence on the issue and told a newspaper in Pennsylvania (188 delegates) that Rev. Wright "would not have been my pastor."

She repeated her criticism at a press conference later in the day. "You know, we don't have a choice when it comes to our relatives. We have a choice when it comes to our pastors and the churches we attend," she said.

She ought to be ashamed. A month ago she stoked the fears that Obama might be a Muslim and now she plays on the fears of Pennsylvanians that the Illinois senator is a radical black Christian. I would expect that kind of nonsensical fear mongering from a Republican, but I'm disappointed when it comes from a fellow Democrat.

Even John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has acknowledged that Clinton and Obama are both honorable Americans. When a conservative radio host attacked Obama at a Cincinnati McCain rally last month, the Arizona senator stood up for his Democratic opponents and apologized for the attack. "I have repeatedly stated my respect for Senator Obama and Senator Clinton," he said and promised to "treat them with respect." That was much classier than Hillary Clinton's comments on Jeremiah Wright.

As a New Yorker, I have been proud of Hillary Clinton's service in the Senate, and I harbor no ill will toward her. If she somehow manages to wrangle the nomination from Obama, I will actively support her general election campaign. But I cannot remain silent any longer while my own senator destroys the Democratic Party, and her own reputation, in a desperate and degrading effort to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

It's time for Senator Clinton to act like a leader that I know she can be. Hilary Clinton not only needs to defend Barack Obama, she needs to apologize to him.

Follow Keith Boykin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keithboykin

Comments

[Darkbane]

Great article. Loved your points.
Unfortunately though Hillary has shown a great disdain for apologies.

Perhaps she will say "If she knew then what she knows now" she would have defended him.

[frustratedinohio]

"But as time went by, and the Wright story lingered on, it seemed Clinton was perfectly willing to let the uninformed public get the misimpression that Barack Obama is moonlighting as an anti-American black nationalist racist. She knows better, and she ought to be ashamed for not speaking up on his behalf."

You are abandoning her because she didn't defend her opponent? You have got to be kidding me. That is ludicrous. Is this not a competition? Obama has been throwing zingers at her left and right and you expect her to defend him. That is your double standard showing.

Should she iron his shirt too?

[silverball]

you are kidding, right???....do you really think she didn't know what a disgusting rovian comment that was..."as far as i know"...and spare me the bs about that is as far as she knows....she and bill know EXACTLY what the are doing and the hair splitting is just a clue as to how politically astute they are....pure rovian....and she does owe an apology....bill too....

[LAJonathan]

She KNOWS that Wright is known and respected, and was invited to the White House during Bill's presidency. She KNOWS all of the facts regarding the media manipulations of the Wright videos. She is PANDERING TO THE FEARS OF THE FEARS OF THE UNINFORMED. Its sick, what she's doing.

[Aleka]

She should defend him because most people have already figured out that the Wright thing was a smear, and not true. Only the uninformed still think he is a "hatemonger", and Hillary is not "uninformed". So what shes doing then is deliberately lying and stoking racist fears in order to kneecap an opponent.

When the republicans look classier than the democrat in how they handle a smear campaign, then we have a problem. When 2 republicans defend Obama, and she is the only one taking the low road against a fellow democrat, we have a problem..she should have at LEAST taken the same road, not the lower one as the repubs. Its really sickening.

[sixletters]

"You are abandoning her because she didn't defend her opponent?"

No, I think the point is that she is using race as a weapon against another Democrat, something that until now I have only seen done by Republicans.

[bozo21]

As if Obama didn't use race in South Carolina against Hillary? You are being hypocritical IMO.

[GoreyFantod]

I am not a supporter of Senator Obama, but it seems clear to me that we on the left do have an obligation to defend one another against attacks from the right, even if the one we are defending is momentarily our opponent.

With all this talk lately of political loyalty, I find it interesting that there are Democrats supporting "Loyal Bushie"-type fealty & personal obligation over adherence to one's core beliefs. Reverend Wright was one of many who, based on principle rather than personal loyalty, supported Bill and Hillary Clinton against attacks from the right. That is precisely the sort of loyalty that I believe was owed to Rev. Wright by Senator Clinton.

Loyalty isn't restricted to giving out patronage jobs or an inside line on a money-making political scam or some other material favor, it can also mean not undermining a person (& his supporters), who stood by you in your time of greatest need. For a leading Democrat to encourage the nonsense being splashed around about Rev. Wright, Trinity UCC & Black Liberation Theology is low enough, but to do so when you owe your political survival, in part, to those same people and their faith is unconscionable.

[Fabienne]

Thank you, Gorey. Well said.

[busybeez]

McCain defended Obama on the Wright issue, saying that a person can't be held responsible for another person's words, and that Obama doesn't feel that way about his country. Should we expect less from a fellow Democrat than from the Republican candidate? It's time that Hillary Clinton showed some honor in her campaign. That's the one tactic she hasn't tried. She has angered half the Democratic party and the media with her fear tactics suggesting that Obama is a radical black (Muslim) Anti-American. How about she just says what McCain has said, "I know Obama and that is not who he is." Even if she has no shame, we feel ashamed.. It's not just about winning, it's also about her honor as a U.S. Senator.

[MPeter]

Here is the Pilot that took Hillary into Tuzla. His name is Air Force Col. William "Goose".

[mojomagic]

Do you have a link to information or what is the point of your post?

[Star123]

it seemed Clinton was perfectly willing to let the uninformed public get the misimpression that Barack Obama is moonlighting as an anti-American black nationalist racist.

Good grief--Obama has had hours and hours of free air time to establish his identity, with more to come. This isn't up to her. And talk about "incendiary" language not appealing to our "better angels."
Unnuanced, too!

[SuppersReady]

The point is she is a Democrat. Not a scum sucking Republican who would bad mouth their grandmother if it meant they would get elected. So what you are saying is.....anything goes....character attacks, whatever. Fear mongering is what Rush, Fox and the rest are all about. So this is what we have come to in 2008. Democrats swift-boating Democrats....great.....


Vote for Ralph Nader.......

[mojomagic]

I can't believe you used this:

The point is she is a Democrat. Not a scum sucking Republican who would bad mouth their grandmother if it meant they would get elected.

It's not a very good tie to use a phrase like "bad mouth their grandmother" Seems like Saint Obama just did this very thing

[dtd]

Better late than never!

[Marie13]

I agree. Thanks for this. Everytime I try to warm up to her campaign --just in case --her tactics push me away. I'd hate to vote McCain, but I will.

[cleveyucks]

Here's the problem with the "I will vote for Hillary no matter what" sentiment. If we as voters do not set boundries for what tactics we will support, then the candidates have no boundries. Hillary has crossed the line long ago for how a respectable candidate should campaign in a primary. Her recent lie about Bosnia and her unbelievably sarcastic "I made a mistake, deal with it!" explaination have sealed it. She is not worthy of my vote. I will not support a person of such low caliber. Period. This election will probably be decided by party leaders. If you do not give them boundaries, they will honor no boundries. If you are willing to support this craven, entitled, destructive candidate even as a lesser of two evils then you will always wind up with evils and deservedly so.

[Nommo]

What sort of New Yorker are you, the ceremonial type? Maybe an upstate type. That's about all we get out of her Senate tenure. Ceremony.

[DukeFan]

Brilliant post and well said!

[geg6]

While I agree, I wouldn't hold my breath for that apology.

[PragRad]

Blame Augustus Caesar also known as Octavian. For two years before the battle of Actium, the real war was one of words against Mark Antony and Cleopatra. This last bit of free speech in the last days of the Roman Republic was the propaganda war against Mark Antony and Cleopatra.

Octavian and his political machine used negative attacks by focusing on the fears of the Romans that were quite supportive of Mark Antony. Octavian's attacks focused on morality, patriotism, and xenophobia. I am just amazed that a little over 2000 years since then we are repeating history.

Clinton has really used these tactics covertly to stir up voters fears concerning morality, patriotism, and xenophobia. So I believe that as the citizens of the United States that we should demand a clean election

I think most all of us can agree that we want to remain a democracy. In this election season, the Internet allows our voices to be "heard." I just want to turn the TV off.