James Clyburn Happy to Play His Familiar Part Once More

Once again -- and for the last time -- the Democratic primary campaign has moved into a southern state, North Carolina, with a large African American population as well as a considerable university and college town liberal vote. Once again, the Barack Obama campaign and its supporters, fresh from a stinging defeat, are trying to stir up false accusations that Hillary Clinton and her campaign have cynically injected racial animosities into the campaign.

The latest round of charges about the Clintons have come from a familiar source, Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest-ranking black leader in Congress. In January, after the Obama campaign suffered stunning defeats in New Hampshire and Nevada, Rep. Clyburn, although nominally uncommitted, joined a chorus of concerted complaint about Hillary Clinton's supposed denigration of Martin Luther King, Jr. and his contributions to the 1964 Civil Rights Act because of her observation that President Lyndon Johnson had played a crucial part in guiding its passage. (Clinton's actual remarks, rarely reported, praised King enormously and were historically accurate.)

Clyburn then jumped on flimsy accusations that former President Bill Clinton had supposedly made subtle racial remarks by calling Obama's claim to unwavering opposition to administration policy in Iraq a "fairy tale," and by likening Obama's eventual victory in South Carolina to those of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988. (The first had nothing whatsoever to do with race: Obama had said in 2004, 2005 and 2006 that he didn't know how he would have voted on Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq because as a state senator he had no access to the intelligence, and Obama voted consistently for war funding as a U.S. senator. On the second matter -- again, rarely reported in full -- Bill Clinton's remark was delivered as part of his praise of Obama's campaign in every state, and Jackson himself publicly deemed it inoffensive.) Clinton had apparently done his wife's campaign a lot of good with his work in New Hampshire and Nevada; but the targeted attack on him had the double effect of marginalizing him while advancing the race-baiter charges.

The Obama campaign had already begun injecting race into the campaign, notably on the morning after the New Hampshire primary, when its national co-chair, Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. of Illinois, went on national television to accuse Senator Clinton of false emotion and racial intent in her tearful description of her commitment to public service. "Those tears also have to be analyzed," said Obama's co-chair. "They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs. Clinton did not cry for." And then Jackson added, disclosing his underlying political agenda: "Particularly as we head to South Carolina where 45% of African-Americans who participate in the Democratic contest." Clyburn immediately followed up, upping the ante by ripping into Bill Clinton and telling him to "chill." At the same time, an official Obama South Carolina campaign memo surfaced, which specified innocuous statements by Clinton supporters that could be twisted into race-baiting remarks -- including the wild claim, built from distorted quotations that Bill Clinton had said his wife was "stronger" than Nelson Mandela.

The charges leveled at the Clintons by Clyburn and others in South Carolina began what has become a completely predictable pattern among Obama, his campaign, and their supporters. First, Obama loses primary campaigns in key states which he had either expected to win (as in New Hampshire and then Nevada) or had worked desperately hard to win (as in Pennsylvania, where he outspent Hillary Clinton by as much as three-to-one). Then, as the campaign moved southward -- to Louisiana and then the "Potomac" primaries following Super Tuesday, to Mississippi following the March 4 Ohio and Texas primaries, and now to North Carolina -- come the furious but false charges, reported in the press as undeniable truths, that the Clinton campaign has indulged in mean-spirited race baiting, as a prelude to upcoming contests in southern states.

Some of these claims have turned out to be hoaxes, such as the release by the campaign, in the aftermath of Super Tuesday, of a supposedly scurrilous photograph of Obama in native African garb. Posted on the Drudge Report and lifted, as it turned out, from another right-wing website, Free Republic, where it initially surfaced, the appearance of the photograph was nevertheless blamed on the Clinton campaign by Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe who called it "the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party in this election." (Obama himself, after dismissing the incident in a public debate with Hillary Clinton, returned to the accusation while on the stump with black voters in Mississippi.)

On other occasions, Obama suggested to mostly black audiences, in coded racial terms, that the Clintons were attempting to confuse them with their criticisms of him. Before the South Carolina, "Potomac" and Mississippi primaries, Obama cheerfully lifted the "hoodwinked, bamboozled" rant from the Spike Lee film Malcolm X, in order to convey to black voters that, whatever he might say about a "post-racial" campaign, racial solidarity against white traducers was crucial to his effort. Denzel Washington, playing Malcolm X, says: "I'm gonna tell you like it really is. Every election year these politicians are sent up here to pacify us! They're sent here and set up here by the white man! I say and I say it again, you've been had. You've been took. You've been HOODWINKED, BAMBOOZLED, led astray, run amok." Barack Obama repeatedly echoed: "Don't be hoodwinked! Don't be bamboozled!"

Other claims have either been either outright fabrications or hysterical distortions: false charges leveled by one popular pro-Obama website, Daily Kos, that the Clinton campaign "blackened" their candidate to make his look menacing by purposely darkening a another photograph of him; and the strained Geraldine Ferraro fracas, in which an awkward remark buried in the Torrance, California Daily Breeze was trumpeted nationally by prominent Obama supporters such as Keith Olbermann of MSNBC's Countdown into accusations said that the Clinton campaign had descended into the politics of a former Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. Then there was the false claim by one of Obama's best known supporters in academia, Orlando Patterson of Harvard, published on the op-ed page of the New York Times, that there was no black child in Clinton's "3 a.m." television ad on national security, a supposedly racist move worthy of D. W. Griffith and Birth of a Nation -- when, in fact, there was a black child in that commercial.

Which brings us back to Representative Clyburn, on the eve of North Carolina, which some have called Obama's firewall state -- a state he must win convincingly in order to head off his latest slide in the primary race. Last week, Bill Clinton belatedly observed that the Obama campaign "played the race card on me" in South Carolina, and cited a conversation he had had with Jesse Jackson to prove his point. Clyburn jumped back in, getting the attention of The New York Times by charging that "black people are incensed" at Clinton and claiming that it is "an almost 'unanimous' view among African-Americans that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton are "committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win." Clyburn may well be correct about perceptions of the Clintons among some black voters; but he simply hides how Obama, his campaign, and their supporters have willfully created that impression.

Remarkably, reports about the Clintons' alleged race-baiting have been reproduced so often and so uncritically in the press that they have attained the status of incontrovertible truth. Evidence and arguments to the contrary can expect either to be ignored (with their arguments dismissed, as Ryan Lizza recently and sarcastically did in The New Yorker, as "mysterious"). Or they can expect to be greeted by ad hominem attacks which do not engage the evidence, and which can even stray (as I have learned directly) into attacks on the author as a racist -- the sort who, back in 1860, sneered at Abraham Lincoln as a "Black Republican." There is no honest dialogue on this issue: only constant reiteration by Obama's supporters of the undeniable truth of the charges against the Clintons, and the personal disparaging of any who dare call the charges into question.

Yet, there are, to be sure, some stray signs that the press may be catching on to what is going on here. After Rep. Clyburn's latest tirade, Maureen Dowd of The New York Times -- who has until now been consistently anti-Clinton and pro-Obama -- raised an eyebrow in her column about Clyburn's endorsement of what Dowd called the "Tonya Harding conspiracy theory," that the Clintons and their supporters were out to destroy Obama by the foulest of means. And playing the race-baiter card runs the enormous risk of deepening the racial divide that will make it more difficult for Obama to appeal to white voters, as it has in the past.

But there may not be time for the Obama campaign to worry about that, given the Pennsylvania results, given the possible outcomes in Indiana, West Virginia, and Kentucky, and given the growing perception (deepened by the continuing outbursts by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright) that Obama may not be electable in November. Incensing black voters in North Carolina -- as well as college and university liberals in the Chapel Hill-Durham area -- would be one way to gain the large majority that Obama needs to regain his footing. And so, yet again, the by now routine charges against the Clintons as race-baiters reappear -- with Representative Clyburn of neighboring South Carolina happy to play his by now familiar part once more.

Comments

[elbzee]

I read these words you wrote sean: "On other occasions, Obama suggested to mostly black audiences, in coded racial terms," and you pretty much lost me. I just couldn't get past that code stuff. EXACTLY WHAT ARE THESE RACIAL CODES US WHITE FOLK DON'T UNDERSTAND?? And who wrote this code? How did you get your white hands on a copy of this code? Are your words also racially coded?

WTF?????

[hank48188]

BAMBOOZELED, HOODWINKED and OKIE-DOKE were the favorite words of Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan to incite black crowds. Obama started using these words to black crowds in S.C. and again in Mississippi. After losing in N.H. Obama wanted to pump up his black vote, many blacks were saying he wasn't "Black Enough" and Hillary had support from many blacks. When Obama used these words they went right over the heads of most whites, but the black folks have been hearing them for years from Malcolm and Farrakhan and Obama wanted to tap into that hate. Go look at Obama speaking in S.C. and Mississippi, you will see.

[FrankBlackFrancis]

so what? it worked. He outflanked the Clintons. good for him.

[tiredoflies]

All good points, but some of these knuckleheads only care that obama wins, not if he uses underhanded tactics. It's sad really.

[lmatthe]

Notice you wrote "after NH." When did Bill make those "Jesse Jackon comments again? So, I ask you...who started the race bating?

BTW.. I've been black all my life. I've never heard of this "coded language" this nitwit speaks of.

[NCMan]

Here is what Bob Kerrey actually said that has been characterized as playing the race card. Remember, Bob Kerrey is not a part of the Clinton campaign. He is simply a supporter. Obama supporteres always like to clrify that when they make sure to point out that Obama didn't say something himself.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/bob_kerrey_praises_barack_hussein_obama/

Now here is what John Kerry said as an Obama supporter

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/20/kerry-obama-can-bridge-d_n_92576.html

They both were making the same point. But John Kerry wasn't called a race-baiter for doing it.

[rosietheriveter4]

I have yet to hear a compelling argument from any O supporter what could possibly be the Clinton's motive for race baiting in SC? How could it possibly be to HC's advantage to alienate AA's in any state? On the other hand, The O camp would certainly stand to gain if they were able to successfully turn blacks against Clinton. Bill Clinton has been revered among blacks for years. Suddenly, in a matter of a few short weeks, prior to SC, blacks are incensed by his "racist remarks". Again, ask yourself which candidate has the most to gain by playing the race card? In my opinion, the O camp has succeeded in making it impossible for anyone to criticize this man for fear of being called a racist. As a result, they have also succeeded in making it impossible for me to vote for BO, were he to become the dem nominee. So much for hope, change, transcending race, and "no more politics as usual"!

[zora77]

Well, let's start with a few:

1. Making Obama "the black candidate" thus rendering him unrelatable to many white voters and relegating him to the corner. (See Bill Clinton)

2. Stirring up resentments about black people only being where they are because they're black - not because they worked hard and earned it. (See Geraldine Ferraro & Bob Johnson)

3. Portraying Obama as a drug dealing/ner-do-well in the Chicago Hood (see Bob Johnson)

4. Preying upon Muslim fears because he's not a Muslim (as far as I know - see Hillary Clinton)

5. Trotting out surrogates to keep the Wright issue in the media because we know it inflames racial opposition and arguments (see Lanny Davis, etc.)

6. Faulting black leaders for being honest and then turning it around on Obama as though he's been asking the Clinton camp to behave this way (see Sean Wilentz and Bill Clinton)

[hank48188]

Obama was the guy using BAMBOOZELED, HOODWINKED and OKIE-DOKE when he got to S.C. to show blacks he was "Black Enough" by using the favorite words on Malcolm and Farrakhan, that was OBAMA playing the card, not some surrogate. Obama himself is the race-baiter, he knows about the power of words.

[ghostwriter5]

Why would Clinton do this is a state where the Black vote is needed to win an election--it is insulting because it would have been stupid and self destructive.

By the way--I don't have time to address each of your issues--but #4 is just nonsense--Sen Clinton was asked a question about Obama three times in a row and I think she didn't know what that that idiot Kroft was getting at --three times she said she thought he was a Christian. This is such as BS point. Please watch the tape intead of taking it out of context. The media made a big deal about it and you let them win by taking it seriously.

[DocHP]

As a former fan of Bill Clinton, I can only suppose that following a remarkable defeat in SC, the Clintons must have felt stunned and betrayed by the African-American community--and it was this shock that promoted Bill to make his Jesse Jackson comments there. But if it wasn't a smart move for the Clintons to play the race card, it would be SUICIDE for the Obama campaign to and they have worked mightily not to, even in the face of certain Obama supporters stating otherwise.
Rosie, I can tell you that, even though I knew he had a "complicated relationship with the truth", I liked Bill. But a shock went through my spine when I heard him utter those words. From a champion of the oppressed, he suddenly seemed like a racist good-ol-boy. For me, it was a scary and chilling moment....like in a movie where you learn that your friend/sweetheart/partner is an agent for the bad guys.

[FrankBlackFrancis]

I've yet to hear a compeling case from any Hillary supporter that she's worth a damn.

[NCMan]

Bill Shaheen's comments in NH were one of the first that were charged by the media and the Obama surrogates as injecting race into the campaign.

Here is a link to what Shaheen actually said in discussing the electability of democratic candidates

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/12/12/post_235.html

There is absolutely NOTHING racial about what Shaheen said. In fact Shaheen himself even references the talk in 2000 about GW's past use of drugs. So, it isn't a discussion of race unless your opinion is that you can't talk about drug use of a black candidate while you can about a white candidate.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/12/12/post_235.html

[hank48188]

I guess I'm not the only white guy that hasn't been BAMBOOZELED and HOODWINKED by all this race-baiting by the Obama team. I'm glad someone is telling the truth on the Huff Post, this place is just a big Obama cheering section. I think yesterday Obama was just pulling the OKIE-DOKE on folks once again, trying to BAMBOOZEL and HOODWINK people into thinking he doesn't agree with all that stuff Wright is selling. He moved to Chicago to learn about black-victimization and even found a wife well versed in the Chicago school of Farrakhan, Wright, The Nation of Islam and Jesse too.

[FrankBlackFrancis]

A black guy uses black language to pander to a black audience and you consider that race baiting. Sounds like someone's hoodwinking you alright.

[lmatthe]

don't sweat ol' hank. He's allowing a white writer to tell him what black people think.

That say's it all

[TeriMcCarthy]

Certainly Mr .Wilentz it is always of course Barack's and his campaigns fault for everything the Clintons have been tarred with, they are never responsible for anything they say or do.

[missouri]

Why do you blame Obama for something Clyburn said?? Bill make the statement about Obama playing the race card and then claimed he didn't make the statement..to me that is the issue!! Clinton is a loon...

Obama has said time and time again he does not feel his losses are race motivated. If he loses it's because he has not communicated well--give the man a break--he has jumped through hoops for the American people and the media!! Instead of apologizing all the time for one thing or the other he should just do like the Clintons--they just ignore it and go on like it's ok because after all they are above reproach!! And the media lets them get by with it....Well the media has said that they are harder on the one that's the front runner--so I am waiting for the media to pounce on Hillary--she is the front runner for the time being!!

[nynick]

Obama is near the end. If he loses North Carolina and Indiana, a shockwave will ripple through the superdelegates. Many will switch back to Clinton. Obama suppporters will cry but the seeds of his defeat can be traced back to the South Carolina primary and the tarring of Bill Clinton as a racist. Many say Bill and Hillary aren't really Democrats, they're evil, they're bad for the party. That version of the party, one without room for people like the Clintons who have worked hard to advance democratic causes for their entire adult lives, isn't a party I want to belong to. I ain't alone. This is a battle for the future of the Democratic party. You have the Arriana branch, those who believe all the hype about Obama and every looney conspiracy about the Clintons. On the other side, you have Clinton supporters who are not willing accept on blind faith the "post partisan" , "post racial" talking points. We support Hillary because we think she's the most qualified and will actually solve problems, not just talk about solving problems. Lately, the Arriana side has been leading. They tried to push the other side right out of their party. Soon, Obama's campaign will be mortally wounded. In the end, Obama and Hillary will have to merge as a united team. Hillary as President, Obama as the VEEP.

[FrankBlackFrancis]

And if your scenario is correct the Democratic Party will split down the middle. Many of us, Obama supporters by default as we percieve him to be the nominee, have so tired of the Clintons we want them gone.
The good news is, you're analysis is way off. He isn't going to lose both, might even win both. I don't care if Hilalry did win the rest of the contests, pledged delgates decide, supers follow their lead. A Hillary nomination at this point of the game is suicide for the party.

[nynick]

Missouri writes:

"give the man a break--he has jumped through hoops for the American people and the media!!"

WTF? Does he want to be President or not? Hillary didn't create the Rev. Wright problem and for all of the vitriol Obama supporters are famous for, even they should realize that this issue is better dealt with in a primary than in the general election.

[samtaylor1]

This is nonsense. And condensing. I personally listen to the news, read the papers, seen Hilliary use Wright against Obama, seen the ugly racist undertones of so many Clinton supporters (not all mind you), and you are saying that I and my Black friends, and young people have been hoodwinked by the Obama campaign? Shame on you.

[NCMan]

please point to the specific times you have seen Hillary use Wright against Obama. She has addressed this issue 3 times. Twice when asked a direct question about it and once when asked about it in the ABC debate.

For some reason you all think it is fair to use things Clinton surrogates have said against Clinton. But, it's not fair to use Wright, an Obama surrogate who held an official position on Obama's campaign, against Obama. How does that work exactly?

[gapanther]

How many times has called super delegates and raised Wright as an issue? Perhaps more than 3?

Name one time Wright spoke as a surrogate of the campaign.

[lmatthe]

HC: "...If i'd have heard it, I'd have left the church..."

[FrankBlackFrancis]

You answered your own question. Which begs another, why'd you ask it?

[adavis08]

Sorry I myself aren't buying your agruments. You are clearly a Clintonite. There have been too many so called coincidences that Hillary supporters have been part of meant to discredit
Senator Obama. The last one on Monday at the press club with coincidently Reverend Reynolds( a Clinton supporter) arranging for Rev Wright's speaking engagement. The native garb picture given to Matt Druge by the clinton campaign, and the list goes on. Hill and Bill thought they had manifest desinty for the Oval Office again and are destroying anyone in their path.

[azbirds]

I am a white woman, and I will never vote for a Clinton again.Their actions has demeaned the position of ex-Pres. and first Lady. The Clinton/McCain ticket has done everything they can to disgrace Obama and disregard the black voter. Only FOX News has announced that Rev. Barbara Reynolds, was responsible for inviting Rev. Wright to the Monday Nat. Press Corp Meeting. Rev. Reynolds is a Clinton supporter. The black voter has every reason to be upset with the Clinton's, as well as the rest of the voters. The Clinton/McCain ticket will only give us more of Bush, no matter what lies they tell us. We have to get away from this Dynasty and vote for a new Name---Obama.

[rosietheriveter4]

Let's be clear. If it were not for BO's controversial relationship with the good Rev in the first place, none of this would matter. Stop using Clinton as your scapegoat and realize that in the end, the only thing that will have brought BO down, is BO! (Rev Wright, bittergate, Rezko, etc.......)I am all for the first black prez, just not this one!

[Wellstone6]

So, it's Barbara Reynolds' fault that Rev. Wright said what he said for years BEFORE he started to damage the Obama brand? Get real.

I had suspected, and now see confirmed: Obamabots are loonie-tunes.

[punkingale]

Lynn Sweet, of the Chicago Sun-Times, had to correct Lawrence O'Donnell on this same point yesterday on MSNBC. She said it's not true Barbara Reynolds had anything to do with Reverend Wright being invited to speak to the Press Club, but she is a Hillary supporter.

[PadrePio]

Obama knows his supporters are all victims. They love their victimhood, both his black and white supporters. They can't survive without seeing themselves as down trodden.That's why he played the race card/victim card and will continue to do so. He has yet to win a big state other than Illinois and his response to Wright will hurt him in the black community and will not help him with us bitter white working men. So here we go again the Clinton's are mean, nasty and play rough and the Precious is so sensitive that he just wilts under the pressure of both Clinton's campaigning against him. And that's racial.

[FrankBlackFrancis]

hahahahahahahaha!
I have no idea where you got that, but thanks for the laugh. How absurd. He's wilting alright. That's why he's winning this race.

[lmatthe]

You bitter white working men have voted republican anyway in the last 2 elections. Argumants can be made that the democrat won both. The Clintons started this race bating crap in S. Carolina. You can't deny that.

BTW... I'd rather be a victim than a fool whom votes against his own best interest because of something like the color of ones skin...

[JavanDyer]

I cant say i agree, Clinton first said that obama was gogin to win the black vote!! not obama, clinton went on to say jesse jackson one the primary in SC not obama and his surrogaes, i mean loads of other canidates for the nimnee for south carolina primary has one SC , even bill so why would he say that!?? please some one answer my question?

[hank48188]

Go look at the record and look at Obama's speeches in S.C., you will see the truth

[LucieLee]

Show me where Clyburn actually called Bill Clinton a "racist"? It didn't. Bill Clinton only has himself to blame.....saying that the Obama campaign was "playing the race card on me" on a radio show, then when asked about it later by a reporter, denied saying that he said that......What is THAT? Plausible deniability?! Bill Clinton keeps touting the fact of all he has done for African Americans throughout his public life.......but then when he and surrogates for Hillary keep bringing up these 'coded" messages as well as "coded" stereotypes..directing them at an African American man who is well on his way to making history in this country....makes some wonder, who is the real Bill Clinton? Rep. Clyburn is correct in his assessments and is correcet in questioning the Clinton campaign...and I applaud him for it.

[hank48188]

Just look at Rev. Wright, William Ayers and Tony Rezko and you'll see the real Obama, don't be HOODWINKED and BAMBOOZELED by all the MSM spin, go look at the record and read what people said, you will see the real deal

[liberalnfree]

So many comments here resort to insult without presenting counter evidence. They repeat media fairy tales without examining them. The media perpetuated the big lie in 2000, that Al Gore was a pathological liar. He went on to win the Nobel Prize. Now the big lie is that the Clintons played the race card against Obama.
The MLK remark? She praised him and said LBJ was necessary to get Civil Rights through Congress. That is not racist. The Jesse Jackson remark? The reporter asked President Clinton why it took him and his wife to go up against Senator Obama in South Carolina. President Clinton responded that Jesse Jackson had won there before, implying that the demographics of the state favored Obama. Why is that racist? For weeks political commentators had told us that if Obama lost in New Hampshire and Nevada, he could recover in South Carolina because of the demographics. There is nothing wrong with that-- people like to support credible candidates from their own ethnic groups-- JFK got 90 plus percent of the Irish Catholic vote.
But now the media lie is "the Clintons played the race card." Professor Wilentz lays out the evidence countering this argument, and he is greeted by insults.

[BubbaC33]

The lies used against the Clintons are similar in nature, if not content, to the lies used against Al Gore in 2000. THe MSM did not like Gore on a personal level and it affected their coverage of the campaign. George W. Bush was given a pass throughout the campaign and the MSM looked for mistakes made by Gore. In addition, the MSM kept alive lies told about Gore, such as the "I invented the internet" lie. Gore never said it, never even implied that he had done such a thing. Cokie Roberts repeated it. Dowd, Rich, And even Ms. Huffington worked to kept it alive.
And now the MSM has decided it does not like Hillary Clinton and has worked to find ways to attack and criticize her campaign. And the MSM has attacked her on a very personal level. Obama has not been given the free pass W enjoyed, but WaPo has fact checkers going over every speech Ms. Clinton gives, something it does not do to Obama or McCain.
Bottom line, the MSM is much more concerned with staying in the herd and making a lot of money rather than reporting the truth or providing fair and ethical reporting. Russert, Matthews, and even Olbermann have gone over the edge and have left behind any journalism and ethics.

[FrankBlackFrancis]

So how can we possibly expect Hillary Clinton to win in November if she can't properly manipulate the media?
It seems Obama can. Good thing he's the nominee.

[tiredoflies]

speaking of russert, obama will be on mtp sunday, where I am sure the toughest question asked will be would you like sugar with your tea mr. obama. obama is in trouble and it is going to take more than his third attempt at dismissing wright to get him out of it.

[cruzan]

Well done, Sean.

I am an AA woman and have alot of respect and like Sen. Obama a great deal. I also am not a Hillary-hater. I think both candidates have strengths and weaknesses that need to be considered and evaluated. I am still undecided and a registered Independent.

While Hillary has engaged in some shameless tactics, I am so sick of the media's love affair with Obama that they are unable to report facts without the swoon. Both campaigns have played the race card! It's patently obvious, but destroying the Clintons is the media's obsession and this race card plays right into the narrative. (Most AA I have spoken with did not even read the "fairytale" comment or the MLK comment, but were reacting based on what they heard on urban radio for the most part. Anyone who actually took the time to read what Bill Clinton said would have seen what he said. Donna Brazille should receive a tremendous amount of blame for inflaming this because either she did not read the comment or has comprehension problems.)

Sen. Clyburn does not speak for me and frankly, does not know what he is talking about.

I get that AA are thrilled that we could see our first AA to serve as President. I guess I am just in the minority of AA who is trying to decide the best candidate for this very challenging job, unrelated to gender or race.

[samtaylor1]

Cruzan,

I have to disagree with you. I am not voting for him solely because he is black. This notion that 90%of a people support a candidate solely because of his skin tone is just not true. Sure it helps, like it helps the Clinton with 40-50 year white women. But these people like me, I am sure, like there candidate because of many legitimate reasons, one of which is identity politics.

On another note. I am always told the Clinton's are such good friends of Black people. Can anyone (this is not directed at Cruzan). List the things she has done? I am not from NY so I don't know New York politics. So far it seems like a one way friendship

[cruzan]

Samtaylor1,

I did not say that AA were only voting for Obama because he was AA. (I do know quite a few who are voting solely on that basis, and while I don't agree with that, people choose to vote for people for all sorts of reasons, including white woman who relate to Hillary).

My only point is that Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton need to tell me what they are going to do to address the myriad of problems that will face the next President. Slogans about "change" and "yes we can" do not resonate with me, although they resonate with others.

I wonder if you would agree that Obama would be receiving 90+% of the vote, if he was white?

This primary, sadly, has divided the country by race, and that is not a good thing.

[elbzee]

Oops, sorry cruzan, I thought you were an alcoholic! Really threw me when you wanted to get our first AA elected. I couldn't figure how the alcoholic chimp got involved. I may be slow, but I get it eventually!

[tiredoflies]

cruzan....thanks for a thoughtful, objective reply. This is what we should all be concerned with...having the best candidate become the nominee. There is a formidable job ahead of the one that gets to the WH. America is in a world of hurt and we cannot be too careful who we choose.

[CapitalistRebel]

Wake up, Sean! It's not just blacks that have lost respect for Bill Clinton, it's Americans in general! Did Clyburn force him to rehash the Bosnia story and falsly claim that his wife said something once, in the morning, when she was tired? No, that was all him. In that radio interview last week, he said "they played the race card on me!". Less then 24 hours later, he flat out denied he said it and lashed out at a reporter who was asking a legitimate question. This man was once the King of the Democratic party, but no more. He sees Obama about to take that crown away from him and he can't deal with it.

Another thing....Obviously Jesse Jackson wouldn't claim to be offended by Bill's remarks! He's not going to sit there and say "Yes, it's offensive to compare Obama to me". We all know that Bill was trying to marginalize Barack by telling people, like Jesse, he would win some Southern States (read: the ones with a lot of blacks) but that would be it.

By the way, if I didn't see your name at the top of the paper, I would've thought this was another post by Lanny Davis.

[baldingeagle]

What does it say about your opinion of Jesse Jackson that Obama should be insulted by such a comparison? I am a 56-year-old white male. I admire Jesse Jackson. He was with Dr. King when he died. He inspired me when he did a keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention. If there hadn't been a Jesse Jackson, there probably wouldn't be a Barak Obama.

Now, I will acknowledge that Clinton was trying to reduce the impact of Obama's victory in SC by saying other black politicians have won SC and then lost the nomination. That's what campaigns do, downplay wins of their opponents. But it's only "insulting" if you have a low opinion of Jesse Jackson. I don't. Why do you?

[CapitalistRebel]

I have nothing but respect for Mr. Jackson. My only point here was that Bill was trying to marginalize Obama by comparing his candidacy to Jackson's failed attempt in the 80's. He wasn't comparing them as people, persay, but rather their campaigns and, IMHO, the underlying message was "Obama's gonna win some AA heavy states, but he'll lose in the end just like Jesse Jackson".

There is a significant difference between downplaying the impact of your opponents win ("I was outspent, they had institutional support in this state, etc) and reminding voters that the last "legitimate" black candidate only went so far.

[hank48188]

Hillary embellished her story about Bosnia, big deal, I have many friends that do the same, I'm sure you do as well, the fish gets bigger, the snow gets deeper. This seems to happen with the passage of time, very human.

[missouri]

Very human to lie???????? Why do you people make excuses for the Clinton's and their many lies???? That's why they have always gotten by with it!!

[CapitalistRebel]

I was talking about how Bill lied defending her embellishment. If they had both just come right out and said "Ok it was exaggerated, haha." I don't think it would have gotten so much press. But she acted indignant and she, just like Bill, continued to lie about it instead of just owning up to it. I agree with you, everyone does it, but the Clintons didn't do themselves any favors in how they handled it.

Also, it just demonstrates a pattern of behavior with them. See my comment about the radio interview.

[latinjum]

Hillary didn't "embellish" her story about Bosnia, she lied, and in the last debate, she admitted she had lied. She said she had made statements that "she knew not to be the case", that she had said things "she knew not to be the truth". So, you tell me, if you say something you know not to be the case and know not to be the truth, what is that other than lying?