My Recollection of Hillary Clinton at the 1995 Camp David Meeting

After spending much of the day doing the sorts of things that normal teacher/scholars do, I returned to the blogosphere to see a raging debate about who said what at the January 1995 meeting convened by the Clintons at Camp David to help them sort through the 1994 election debacle and help him prepare for the 1995 State of the Union Address. I was there (the only female intellectual-scholar invited), and the tenor of the discussion was one of the instances I was referring to last Saturday in my post on TPM (I also attended a late 1993 intellectuals' dinner at the White House, where similar discussions occurred). The early 1995 meeting at Camp David was a many-hours-long seminar featuring about a dozen intellectuals plus a bunch of White House insiders, talking with Bill and Hillary Clinton and Al Gore. It was a fascinating window into how the Clintons were coping with the massive health care debacle and Congressional election defeats of late 1994.

Ben Barber later wrote a 2001 book about this and other Clinton salons with intellectuals, and I remember him taking lots of notes at Camp David -- which obviously lay the basis for his 2001 account. In that book, which many of us read when it came out years ago, he gave vivid and accurate renditions of the discussions I heard and participated in, and I have spoken to other attendees at various Clinton salons who agree on Barber's accuracy. Obviously, contemporaneous notes and a book written years ago, long before today's arguments, are the best possible evidence -- especially since Barber is reportedly now a Hillary Clinton supporter. His previously documented reports are much better evidence of what was said in 1995 than instant "recollections" now scrounged up by the HRC and Obama campaigns.

Barber reports in his 2001 book that Hillary Clinton said "Screw 'em" about southern working class whites who did not support Bill Clinton. Two other scholar-particiants, Alan Wolfe and Harry Boyte, agree she said this. Reported demurrals (and not a clear denial) come from Clinton staffers Bruce Reed and Don Baer, not from the independent intellectuals in attendance. But independent witnesses who keep notes trump employees any day.

I have gone back to my 1995 notes to check my recollections of the event. My notes do not have any exact words, so I am not going to try to corroborate a particular phrase from Hillary Clinton or any other speaker.

But what is clear in both in my memory and my notes is that there was extensive, hard-nosed discussion about why masses of voters did not support Clinton or trust government or base their choices on economic as opposed to what people saw as peripheral life-style concerns. Hillary Clinton was among the most cold-blooded analysts in attendance. She spoke of ordinary voters as if they were a species apart, and showed interest only in the political usefulness of their choices -- usefulness to the Clinton administration, that is.

I vividly remember at the time finding it impressive that Bill Clinton (NOT Hillary Clinton) showed real empathy for the ordinary people whose motives and supposedly misguided choices were under analysis. Ironically, just as Barber reported, Bill Clinton was the one who combined analysis and empathy, much as Obama himself did in his full San Francisco remarks.

I think this whole angle of "gotcha" politics about snippets of speech transposed from one context to another is ridiculous and pathological for democracy in America -- and I cannot fathom why the Clintons or George Stephanopoulos are descending to this dirt, not to mention the guilt-by-association crap. It is particularly despicable of them to criticize Obama for the sort of observation/analysis that was routine in and around the 1990s Clinton White House. And I cannot help but feel there is a psychological edge of pure envy in Bill Clinton's attacks: Obama is empathetic and charismatic as well as smart, just like Bill was back then, in those so much better days!

Over and out. I am going to try to find a way to preserve in amber my better memories and feelings about the Clintons, so as not to lose altogether the sense of admiration I once felt, but can no longer.

Related: Sam Stein: Hillary Clinton On Southern Working Class Whites In 1995: "Screw 'Em"

Comments

[Trueheart]

Well, Ms. Skocpol doesn't recall the exact phrase being used.

But she does remember that Mrs. Clinton was being analytical and calculating in her role as a strategist. So what? I used to work for Democratic strategy consultants, and this is how they talk about "working" voter populations so that they can win. I ended up hating being a part of it, so I don't do that kind of work any more. But that's how they play.

And if you think Mr. Obama is not employing exactly the same kinds of strategic thinkers, you're misguided.

[CalexenderJ]

That was exactly her point. It's beyond hypocritical for Sen. Clinton to feign outrage that Barack's description of the working class (however inartful it may have been) when she has uttered similar sentiments herself. It's purely politics and she deserves to be called out for it.

[Trueheart]

There is one difference. She made her remarks (perhaps "SCREW EM" but perhaps not exactly that phrase) within the context of a closed-door, internal campaign strategy meeting, where it is par for the course to talk like that. He made his "inartful" remarks in public, speaking to a group of donors. Words matter. Context matters.

[ldsrapha]

I think you are misguided. There is a reason those thinkers have SELECTED to move to Obama. It is because they were sick of the DIRECTION given to them under the Clinton Administration. Obama, has the message of positive change from the top down.

[Trueheart]

I'm sorry, but I am cynical about how much systemic change Obama can achieve, especially when he's got such seasoned heavy hitters advising him.

These upper echelon strategy consultants, academics, idea people are all professionals who have power and influence in their own fields. That's why a presidential candidate wants to confer with them. Some of these people are involved for a higher purpose and the greater good, but others are in it for the prestige and shine of being associated with the winning campaign for the Presidency. If you're lucky enough to make the inner circle, then you get a job with the new administration. If not, it does wonders for a resume and opens a lot of doors. These are people who love power. They don't associate with John Q. Public--they study him.

Perhaps I am a cynic, but I don't believe that there is anything Barack Obama has done or will do with his campaign that is capable of changing the political players who have positioned themselves close to him. He will need their experience in the general election.

[realist333]

Truly said!
Nor is this brand of Realpolitik unique to either party or indeed to the political landscape of the United States - although it was the JFK campaign of 1960 that first developed strategy on the basis of demographics.

[jwsub28]

I think we are missing the point here. If this was Obama that said "SCREW EM" like Hillary Clinton did the media would be all over this. Why are the pundits not talking about this? If the 1960's are free game for Hillary to expand on, which I find ridiculous because her husband pardoned Weathermen during his term at the White House.

She was saying SCREW EM referring to southern white voters that would not vote for Bill Clinton!!
This is unbelievable! Do your job Media, why didn't Georgie and Charlie pick up that tidbit for ABC, they seem to like to ask TABLOID type questions.

Obama has tried to be above these dirty politics but she wants to go down in the garbage. She says she has baggage, Hill there is so much baggage when they start digging through it , it will bury you!!

[getrealalready]

Then there's the stuff about Bill that speaks volumes. After hearing his snippet that politics is "a contact sport," PENNSYLVANIA, -please know your facts and read between the lines. Some leaders pardon crooks like Clinton did for Richards and Bush will do for Cheney. How many would Hillary pardon who are probably now on her list of superdelegates?

[cowgirlblues]

Are you calling the Superdelegates a bunch of criminals looking for Obama to pardon them?

[Suprshrink]

Because this happened 13 years ago in a private setting and does not pertain to this election. Bobby Kennedy worked for Joe McCarthy during the House investigation of "Un-American Activities." He nevertheless became beloved because he traveled the country meeting people and learning from his own experiences how he wanted to govern. I wonder if any one of these bloggers has never made a comment in their lifetime that could be used against them now. We all look back under a microscope.

[Trueheart]

Well said.

[campgranata]

To see how she has treated the 'little folks', her staff or the state police or the secret service why not have them step forth and report. Or did they all sign confidentiality statements?

[northcan]

They laugh at Hillary so bad in Britian they call her Lady MacBeth. Her sense of entitlement is a pathological problem with Hillary. Always has been. The scary thing is this power driven woman does everything, everything to win. I often wonder what her daughter and mother are really about...?? They act just like her, the same pathology. I know that Dems have a fear of her in Office...she has an extensive background in 'hidden foundation's, meeting with middle east, chinese, russian diplomat's, legislation has been passed to use the fast lane for donation's, every little bit left of America is being purchase by the Clinton's power. It is truly frightening and it has to be stopped. Hillary tells you the positive, Bill talks the negative....always been like that, that way she's ahead of the fray. Teamwork

[randomx6]

Her mother? her daughter?
" I know that Dems have a fear of her in Office...she has an extensive background in 'hidden foundation's, meeting with middle east, chinese, russian diplomat's, legislation has been passed to use the fast lane for donation's, every little bit left of America is being purchase by the Clinton's power."

Ohhhh. And the littel green men are landing next week to help her win PA.!

[mikekev58]

The laugh at Hillary so bad in ... Britain??? Who gives a flying-you­-know-what about whoever is laughing in Britain.

That's the nation that gave us Maggie Thatcher...and Tony "Bush's Lap-dog" Blair, a co-conspirator in the immoral, illegal war his master launched.

Methinks that nation doth .... whatever.

[Manx]

I used to be a Clinton admirer and supporter, but when Hillary morphed into Tonya Harding in her campaign, I changed my mind. Besides, I don't want a co-presidency.

[7NoTrumpXX]

The Bill and Hill Co-Presidency worked out pretty well. 22,000,000 new jobs. Four Balanced Budgets (the first balanced budget in about 40 years). A surplus as far as the eye could see...until GWB squandered the surplus and created a debt of over 4 trillion dollars himself. Paying 14 billion on the debt (the first president in 60 years to pay a penny on the debt.). Peace in Northern Ireland, End of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. 100,000 police on the streets. Lower crime rate. Lower taxes on the middle class. Low inflation. Low interest rates.

Bill and Hill left the presidency with a 63% approval rating, the highest approval of any president leaving office since polling was started. It was a great co-presidency. And, if they could have run again, they would have been elected for a third term.

This has been a very mild campaign...on both sides. Hillary has suffered about 5 billion dollars worth of "free" negative advertising from the MEDIA. Obama has had virtually a free ride. The media has barely touched him.

As far as I can see, you and I have two choices. Hillary or McCain. One of these two individuals will be the next president. Take your choice. If Obama gets the nomination this time, he will lose, and he will never get the nomination again. He can join the losers club....never to be heard from again. He is 8 years too soon.

[kato1]

I can't remember where on HuffPo I read this (sorry) but it's interesting and something the media will no doubt ignore. Evidently, Hillary is in some trouble regarding shady campaign finance.

I sent the link and the subject Hillary's Fundraising Problem

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49478

I know they must get tons of emails but if each of us could send the same link, he might actually see it. I sent it to [e-mail] - I think that's the correct addy - the msnbc programs seem to have that sort of system. I may send it to race08@msnbc, too. I know that's the correct addy.

[Star2000dancer]

This old news & has been out there forever. It's all over You tube. By the way, if any folks are going to vote for Bush or any other competition, ESPECIALLY if it's not in their best interest, screw 'em.

[BustaMoveNow]

Where have I heard that before...."Let them eat cake!!"???

[bookerone]

So this contributed nothing to a dialog, obviously another whiney Obama supporter checking in.

[DownwithFearMongers]

Theda I implore you to take this to the networks.It seems hypocritical that the media blasted Obama for the bitter remark but let this one go. In the spirit of fairness I think you should make this widely known.

[kikiva]

Yes I implore you too because if the media is stupid enough to take your inexact notes and recollections from 1995, I'd like them to read my diaries from 1995 too, they have some interesting tidbits in them and I too could become famous as you are apparently trying to do. Let me know what they say!

[quest44]

Well isn't that odd that you all jumped on the band wagon dissing Obama because of something a radical he was on a board with did when Obama was 8 years old 40 years ago .But no somehow that had to mean Obama was a Marxist .Give me a break if Hillary says the same thing Obama says but only in a colder cruel way she should not be judged for it but Obama saying something that was taken out of context in the media was in your eyes a major crime. Are you all as blind as those Bush supporters ?

[MissFire]

You know I don't much care whether Hillary said "screw the poor white trash" in 1995 or Obama, in a closed meeting with San Francisco wealthy donors, tried to give a sociology lesson to them so they could understand the poor white trash in Pennsylvania who didn't know enough to vote their economic interest. I'll even grant one or more of Obama's multiple and varying explanations that he did not really mean to give offense.

It still reeks to high heaven of condescension, and that's a smell that your average American (not just your average American redneck) voter doesn't care for.

Both Hillary and Obama have a slight problem; there are perhaps a dozen first tier "elite" law schools in the country; Harvard and Yale are in that dozen. I know that Obama was elected President of the Harvard Law Review--and I have heard that Hillary was Editor in Chief or "President" of the Yale Law Journal.Damn few people in this country have scaled to that academic/l­egal/intel­lectual height. If you countthe dozen or so "elite" law schools in this country, that's 12 people a year.


On the other hand, a good chunk of the voters in this country simply don't care for, and won't vote for, someone who has an aura of being a "snotty ass elite intellectual". Add a little whiff of dishonesty or problems with the truth---which applies to both Obama and Hillary, and you "gotcha" self a real problem of electability.

[getrealalready]

Actually, let's refer to all American History before the presidential campaign run of Barack Obama as PBO. A little dyslexia above (sorry!)

[getrealalready]

if FOXYLADY comments here, don't get hysterical, ok?

[PatrickforO]

I agree with getrealalready. Since I first saw Barack Obama in March 07, I have read and listened to his words. Television as a medium has been 'dumbing down' Americans for over five decades. In my opinion, Barack is a decent man - possibly the first decent and truly moral presidential candidate we've had since Jimmy Carter, and the most charismatic since 1968 prior to Bobby's tragic death. In addition, we can see from his campaign leadership that he really does have the potential to bring Americans together and unite us around the most pressing common causes of our day - Iraq, terror, the ending of the despicable torture of detainees, healthcare, the economy, trade, energy and global warming. Finally, we have someone, as we saw during the shameful ABC debate, who really does try to stick to the high road and discuss the issues. It was very ironic to see - Barack, and then Hillary when she realized she was going too far, keep gently steering the 'moderators' back to the issues as opposed to the politics of triviality. A last word - when Jefferson (I believe) emerged from the first constitutional convention, he was asked what type of government the founders had given us. He replied, "A republic, if you can keep it." Let us keep our republic, please! Barack Obama gives us perhaps the last chance we will have to be strong, to rise up and take back our government.

[randomx6]

If he is so good at bringing people together why do I think he is a fraud? Sure I'll vote for him if, god help us, the dems nominate him, but WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER JIMMY CARTER. If not for Shrub, Carter would be the biggest presidential disaster in the last 75 years.

[getrealalready]

Hillary Clinton does not lack leadership qualities and is an electable president by all standards pre-Obama. From here on in, that period of American History shall be referred to as POB. Others who wish to state in more lenghty discourse why are invited to further my reply...

[hhyatt]

POB or POS?

[getrealalready]

Pre - Barack Obama (which I cleared up in another message)
Standards have changed for the better. New life is stirring.
The Age of Clintonian Democracy is dated now
PBO.

[OnceProudAmerican]

If the Republicans get back in, this country will be SOL!!!

[Raffi]

it's time hillary backers look themselves in the mirror and define themselves as clintonians, or democrats.

[getrealalready]

You mean Clintonian Democrats as future textbooks of American History or Political Science will call them.

[randomx6]

Since over 20% of Obamaniacs say they won't vote for HRC is she is nominated, I think they have some defining to do as well. Obamaniac or Democrat?

[cowgirlblues]

I am an Independant, have never voted republican and i along with many others will vote Nadar

[getrealalready]

I don't like to use the word "jerk" in my comments so I'll use SPOILER. You might also be pretty young, correct? You're going down the wrong path and lack less intelligence than you do manifest on your posts. You and others voting Nader belong on Noah's Ark with your candidate. Please row far away. History has shown what happens with Nader as a spoiler or plant. Study up, cowgirl...

[Artos]

I am an Independent too, an unaffiliated Independent. I won't vote for Nader though, it would be a waste of time. I think he's washed up and irrelevant. Besides that he's too old and tired. Although I'm all for many of his views, he is just not my idea of the right man for the job. While I am not especially thrilled with Obama, I am less thrilled with McCain and Hillary. We get so few choices. I would have to go with Obama though in the final analysis.

[Larry Kegel]

SFreeBorn: I rather have Hillary's Voting Record than Obama.. At least She can make a dection one way are another on a sunbect... Not like Obaba that votes here... I really love to see how He would have voted on the war if He had to... I was against the Vietnam War... That doesn't mean I would make a good President... You need some one that will make the hard diction and then take responibilty for it later... I hate Bush... But at least He is doing what He thinks right... The problem with Bush He won't listen to anyone but Chenney...

[cynicalismo]

Obamacrats dissociate themselves from past Democratic administrations.. They use the same epithets against the Clintons that Republicans used and speak of the Clintonian era using the right-wing invective of the past.

In Obamaspeak, the Clinton years cannot be differentiated from the Reagan/Bush years; Clinton surpluses are like Reagan/Bush deficits; Clinton era job growth equates with W's job loss; Clinton's civil and human rights record is similar to Bush-Cheney's; Clinton's regulatory agencies were as bad as Ron's and W's. The Obamacrats advert to Lewinsky and the blue dress with the same venomous, lip-licking malice used by the right wing conspiracy (and there was a right wing conspiracy). if they could go back in time they would probably vote "guilty" at Bill's impeachment.

Why do Obamacrats denigrate the Clinton years? Fear! Admitting the Clinton years were good could redound to Hillary's credit in some way. They'd rather give up an opportunity to remind the electorate of good times under past Democratic administrations. All this for their dream of the establishment of the Obamacracy, headed by the Obama himself, a political system in which the Republican wolves will lie down with the Obamacratic lambs, while the Obama drives the lobbyists from the legislative temple.

Pass the Kool-Aid!

[getrealalready]

Good times were had by many. Remember when Bill Clinton pardoned Mark Rich? Fat cats.

[kikiva]

Yes, I agree. Ordinary people like me did very well during the Clinton years. It is stupid to criticize a popular president of your own party and compare him to the current disaster of a president from another party. Is Obama sure what party nomination he is running for?

[MaineMike]

Didn't we lose the Democratic majority in Congress during the "grand old Clinton years"?

[myskylark]

Great comment! I'm also angry over Obama's constant merging of the Clinton years with Reagan and both Bush's.That alone is a sign of the dishonesty of his campaign.

Thanks for saying it so well.

[Artos]

cynicalismo ,

As an Independent perhaps I can speak from an outside vantage point. If the shoe fits they should wear it. Just because Obamas campaign may associate certain decisions of Bills years with Republican agendas doesn't mean that it isn't true. Obamas campaign didn't start the muck raking, Hillarys did. Obama as far as I can see tried to take the high road. Insofar as much of the damage we can see happening to our economy and our work force is concerned I do think that is in large part due to Nafta and that was Bills doing. Not Obamas. Just because the actual years during Bills reign were "good ones' doesn't mean that the stage wasn't set for our present dilemma. Bill initiated it and Bush just kept it moving right along. Does that make them birds of a feather, maybe not but it sure makes one wonder. Food for thought.