More On The Obama/Clinton Race Comments - Updated

I had posted on this issue Saturday and apparantly it’s not done developing yet.

A new Rasmussen poll is showing a trend toward Obama, especially among African-American voters:

Somewhat surprisingly, as the campaign has tightened, racial tensions have bubbled to the surface with the two camps exchanging accusations. Those tensions are reflected in this week’s polling data. Overall, Clinton and Obama are close nationally in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll. But, among white voters, Clinton leads 41% to 27%. Among African-American voters, Obama leads 66% to 16%.

It didn’t seem to me that this was going to become a huge issues since in my last post, I examined both Bill and Hillary’s comments and they didn’t seem to be racist in any form. They seem to have been twisted to imply the overtone of race.

However, I think the media coupled with the likes of Al Sharpton have created a bigger issue out of this than need be. Plus, I am surprised that Obama seems to be quietly propagating it throughout his supporters.

Another story on the issue from Breitbart:

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have become embroiled in racially tinged disputes as large numbers of black voters prepare to get their first say in the Democratic presidential campaign.

The candidates and their surrogates are heating up their rhetoric, and it could prove to be combustible beyond South Carolina’s Jan. 26 primary.

Clinton, on defense over comments that she and her husband made regarding Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy and Obama’s fitness for the White House, tried to turn the tables on her top primary rival. She accused his campaign of looking to score political points by distorting their words.

Hillary Clinton had said King’s dream of racial equality was realized only when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of while Bill Clinton said Illinois Sen. Obama was telling a “fairy tale” about his opposition to the Iraq war. Black leaders have criticized their comments, and Obama said Sunday her comment about King was “ill-advised.”

“I think it offended some folks who felt that somehow diminished King’s role in bringing about the Civil Rights Act,” he told reporters on a conference call. “She is free to explain that, but the notion that somehow this is our doing is ludicrous.”

As evidence the Obama campaign had pushed the story, Clinton advisers pointed to a memo written by an Obama staffer compiling examples of comments by Clinton and her surrogates that could be construed as racially insensitive. The memo later surfaced on some political Web sites.

“This is an unfortunate story line the Obama campaign has pushed very successfully,” the former first lady said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I don’t think this campaign is about gender, and I sure hope it’s not about race.”

We’ll see how this continues to play out in South Carolina as well as the MSNBC Democratic Debate tomorrow night from Nevada.

What we have here is a case of a liberal Democrat accusing another liberal Democrat of playing the “race card” and it’s getting quite humorous to watch in my opinion.

Update From Angry:

It seems that the story is snowballing into quite a few different spins on the story such as this one from the AP via Yahoo:

By MICHAEL DUFFY
Mon Jan 14, 1:55 PM ET

Whenever longtime Democrats gather to note how the chemistry and calculus of the 2008 campaign seem to favor their party this year, one or another will always add some version of the following: “Yeah, but we could screw this up before it’s over.”

After the past few days, the pertinent question to ask is, is the crack-up happening already? Far-fetched as it would have seemed a month ago, the seeds of self-destruction are being planted in the war of coded words about race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The bickering has exploded in the space of a week into Topic A in the Democratic race, supplanting for the moment the war and the economy and health care - and shows no sign of a quick resolution.

So yes, are the Democrats about to screw it up yet again?

Both campaigns are stoking this fire - and worrying at the same time about what this could do to them in the fall. They ought to be concerned: Keep this up and neither candidate may be able to marshal the votes from the various corners of the Democratic coalition that he or she will need in the fall. As pollster Andrew Kohut has noted, a party which found that it had at least two candidates who were seen as widely “acceptable” to its various factions just a few weeks ago could soon find that happy consensus has evaporated.

It seems that the general opinion is that in the long run, the more they fight, the more the republican party can parlay it into a victory, however I would have to contend that the republican party still has no clear favorite and that both parties having a major problem of their own most likely offsets any momentum one party could gain from the other’s troubles, unless one of these candidates manages to rise above all of this mess on both sides.

Update by Nate

It appears now that both the Obama and Clinton campaigns are now trying to downplay this issue. Obama had come out saying that the Clinton’s probably weren’t insinuating race and the Clinton campaign has said that Obama probably wasn’t propagating the rumors.

I’m betting that we’re not going to hear too much of this from the campaigns in the coming days. Neither side wants to risk alienating voters since it’s so incredibly close in Nevada coming up soon. I think this was a small test and both sides realized it would be a lose-lose situation.

Update by Nate

Here’s Dick Morris on Hannity & Colmes earlier with his take on the situation:

I’m just not so sure I agree with Morris that the Clinton’s are deliberately trying to politicize race in this election. There’s nothing wrong with criticizing an opponent, it’s the only way to differentiate your positions from their’s. But they’re comments, seen at the beginning of that video, just do not cry racist to me. I’m no fan of the Clinton’s but they have been exploited by the media over these comments in my opinion.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Leave a comment »
Visit the You Decide 2008 Store »
Related Posts:

Note: The comments section below contains opinions and views from the online community at YouDecide2008.com, read at your own risk! Please don't assume that YouDecide2008.com agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand, this is an open forum. Be respectful or posts will be removed.

4 Responses to “More On The Obama/Clinton Race Comments - Updated”

  1. Nate — perhaps a bigger focus for us at the moment is the viability of the Michigan Democratic Primary. There are 156 potential delegates out there, with a choice of Hillary Clinton or “uncommitted” at the moment.

    Why has Hillary not gotten flack for never withdrawing her name (like Biden, Obama, Edwards, and Richardson did in early December)?

    And if the race gets closer — and super Tuesday yields somewhat even results, 156 delegates overwhelmingly for Clinton could be an enormous shift– IF they are allowed to cast their vote.

    Report Comment

  2. i think it is disingenious and feculent for a man (Johnson) to say he has a problem with a person history of drug use who made billions of of videos of young black men talkin about kiling and drug dealing…just another factor I believe that is leading to the fall of America…. poor mr or mrs next president

    Report Comment

  3. I agree with you that this is not blatantly racist — but it was an incredibly unintelligent move on her part.

    Obviously she is equating JFK (the hopeful president) and MLK (the one working on the ground) to Barack Obama, and stressing that she is like LBJ, who was the president who ‘got it done.’

    But there is absolutely no good direction you can go in, when critiquing the effect MLK had on the Civil Rights movement and discussing the fact that a white president was the one who “DID” get things done.

    She was not being racist toward Obama, in my eyes, she was being racist in her use of history. How could an African American become president of the United States during that time period? Racism is about power-displacement, and simply trumping the fact that a white man could have the power to do what a black man couldn’t (not just any black man, but MLK), is either terribly ignorant, or very prejudicial.

    Report Comment

  4. I must say as a 43 year old female for the first time felt a need to vote, only to be let down because the one democrate I felt very strong about was not on the ballit, very disappointed…not worth the time to go out and vote.

    Report Comment

Leave a Reply

You can use these XHTML tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Sphere: Related Content

Trackback URL

Visited 1184 times, 1 so far today
Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS)
Comments (RSS)

My Zimbio

This site requires a modern browser
and at least 1024x768 screen resolution
to display properly