The Race Card
Posted January 14th, 2008 by Da King
Surprise, surprise. I guess I should have seen this coming, but I didn't. I keep hoping we have grown past all this stuff, but we haven't. Here we are approaching the South Carolina primary, the first with a significant percentage of black voters (50% of 2004 S.C. primary voters were black), and suddenly, out of the blue, the Clintons are charged with being racists, based on racially insensitive remarks that Hill and Billary supposedly made.
What were the 'racially insensitive' remarks made by the KKKlintons ?
1. Hillary said Martin Luther King's dream of racial equality was only brought to fruition when LBJ signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, her meaning being that it takes action along with words to accomplish desired change. She was trying to contrast her experience and action with Obama's words.
2. Bill said Obama was telling a "fairy tale" about his opposition to the Iraq war.
If you are wondering how any of that is racist, I'm right there with you. I'm wondering too. I agree Hillary's comment about MLK was ill-conceived. After all, it could hardly be said that King wasn't a man of action. He was. He did a lot more than just make speeches, and without him, there probably is no Civil Rights Act passed in 1964. That doesn't make Hillary's comment racist. You really have to go fishing to extract that meaning from her words, and it appears Obama's campaign did go fishing. An Obama staffer compiled a list of statements from the Clintons that they thought could potentially be spun as racial, and used against Hillary.
Does this mean Bill isn't the first black president anymore ?
Is this an example of how Obama is going to bring people together ?
Hillary successfully defended herself against the silly racial charge on yesterday's episode of Meet The Press (and after the race subject was finished, she spent the rest of the program lying her butt off about her shifting positions on the Iraq war and everything that happened back in the late 90's. That was must-see-tv. Classic Clinton Crapola).
For his part, Bill Clinton has been making the rounds of black radio stations in South Carolina, apologizing for the racial statement he never made. White guilt is incredible, isn't it ?
Expect Obama to disavow this entire subject very soon (now that the point has been made, and the race card played, that is). Ain't politics grand ?
January 14th, 2008 at 9:44 am
This comment was on TalkingPointsMemo.com..
"I think that the Clintons' anti-Obama strategy is more subtle than commentators are realizing. It is in the nature of a "provokatsiia", as the Russians say. Cuomo didn't utter the phrase "shuck and jive"without forethought; nor did Clinton bring up LBJ and MLK on the spur of the moment. Both are experienced street-fighting politicians who don't say that kind of thing to the press without thinking it through. Such comments are a provocation, waving a red cloak in front of the Obama people. When they respond angrily with charges of racism, suddenly they look like Jessie Jackson redux…just the kind of angry, militant black folks who scare white people (btw I think black anger and militancy are completely understandable…this is just a point about how much of the white public reads such charges of racism). Then the Clintons deny responsibility.
The whole point was to get the Obama people to respond angrily, which they did. Clintons win."
You're 180 degrees off in your evaluation of the topic.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:35 am
King writes:
"Bill said Obama was telling a "fairy tale" about his opposition to the Iraq war. If you are wondering how any of that is racist, I'm right there with you."
King, King. You’re good soul, but you just don’t get it. Slick’s remarks [and Comrade Hillary's, too] are racial insensitive and racist because, for at least the past twenty years, the liberals has taught the blacks that they have a right to paranoid about any slight, no matter how innocuous or imaginary.
This was done for a purpose, namely to keep the Negroes in a heighten state of victimhood so as to benefit the Dims at election time.
What you now see being played out is one of the laws of political correctness that the liberals and the Dims formulated in their effort to 1) control political and cultural debates in America and 2) win elections.
What is so rich about this situation is that here you have one group of Dims (the Clintonistas) trying to out race-bait the other (The Obamas). The Dims are being hoisted up on their own ugly petard of race baiting. It’s about time.
All this is good entertainment … and it can only get better. For example, wait until the Clintons and/or their stooges start examining the black racist church that B. Hussein Obama attends in Chicago. Or how about Obama being endorsed by the Jew-hater, Louis Farrakhan.
No wonder the dim Dims that haunt this web site won't say who they support — Clinton or Obama. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. It's only too bad Barny Frank wasn't in the Dim primary race; then political correctness would really have 'em by the short hairs.
There is a sliver lining to all this, however. The true nature of the Dims is being exposed to the blacks. With a little luck, this could wake many of them up to the fact that their overwhelming alligence to the Dim Party is, more than anything else, what is keeping them and their children back.
The stakes here are high, for if/when the scales fall from the eyes of a sizable number of blacks, the Dim Party will become extinct as a national force. Then, the leftists who now control the party will be kicked out and the party will be forceable reformed back into respectability and– believe it or not — become once again the Democratic Party.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:40 am
King, you said "Ain't politics grand" and Red followed up with point that the Clintons swear they didn't mean what they had said the way Obama's people took it.
Fellows may I say that every day these two camps do something new to prove that politics indeed are grand. One side throws out some crap, the other side reacts and the originator of the deal denies ever sayiing such a thing. It is a bit sickening watching them start their rumors and then sitting back and watching and before it is over blaming someone on the right for starting the story. Yep, politics is one of the grandest piles of crap I know of.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Vince, have you ever heard of spell check? Conjugate a verb once in awhile, won't you? You should have learned that in Reading 101.
January 14th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
King,
The country will celebrate Martin Luther King’s birthday in one week's time — on February 21. I wonder if Comrade Hillary will go to a black gathering (church or whatever) and put on an affected Negro accent like she did last year.
Then, the audience, I suppose oblivious to the fact that Big Sister was actually patronizing them, applauded. I don’t think Hillary would get away with such smarmy behavior this year, do you?
But let’s see. You can’t put anything past these Clintons.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Yeah, King, this one flew right over your head. Reverend's post is spot on. However cynical you think the Clintons are, it's a little more cynical than that. They know what they're doing. They wanted to bait Obama into the identity politics he has thus far stayed above. The Clintons gain because their supporters are already apparently tolerant of this kind of polarizing, low-brow political jousting. Obama loses because his supporters are hoping for the anti-Clinton… a candidate who can stay above the nastiness that has plagued our political discourse for some time now.
January 15th, 2008 at 11:12 am
To all,
Looks like you all think I'm out to lunch on this one, that I'm not cynical enough regarding the Clintons motivations (boy, that's hardly ever been the case before). Maybe I'm not, but Obama did call for an end to this, just like I predicted (after Obama's people and everybody else weighted in, of course). I've heard many racist statements made the last couple days over this manufactured dustup, but none of them have come from the Clinton camp.
To Rev,
You said, "I think black anger and militancy are completely understandable…".
Those are just the kind of racist statements I was referring to. Thanks for the example. Such talk is divisive and prejudicial. It keeps the idea of black victimhood at the hands of the white devil going for the race hustlers like Sharpton to profit from, as well as the race hustlers in the Democratic party.
However, you did get one thing right. Obama's people brought up the race issue, not the Clintons. I still think it's quite a stretch to turn Bill or Hillary's words into racist statements. It takes more than a little hypersensitivity.
Gee, I can't believe I'm defending the Clintons. Maybe I have gone off track here, LOL.
January 15th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Yeah, King, I have been defending the Clintons, themselves, as their words can easily be defended. However, I don't defend their machine because there is plenty of crap flowing from the campaign without coming out of the principals' mouths. I don't see one side as any more defendable than the other and I know that the Clintonistas know how to use words to get out their message without actually saying a thing.
That is the reason I talked about the rumors that both camps plant for the media to get excited about at the really interesting thing about how dirty politics works.
January 15th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
"I've heard many racist statements made the last couple days over this manufactured dustup, but none of them have come from the Clinton camp. "
Of course you didn't hear any direct racist statments from the Clintons, King.
Slick and Comrade Hillary DEAL OFF THE BOTTOM OF THE DECK which means you're not suppose to see (hear) it. But it was there.
The reason the liberal media is pushing the concept of a truce between these two-race baiting camps is because they know that the on going ugliness between Obama and Clinton is bad for the Dims in November.
January 15th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
King!
Hot of the presses: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323025,00.html
“Embattled Duke Lacrosse Prosecutor Mike Nifong Files for Bankruptcy“
RALEIGH, N.C. — The disgraced former prosecutor who led the debunked Duke lacrosse rape case has filed for bankruptcy.
Mike Nifong cited more than $180 million dollars in liabilities and only $243,898 in assets of real and personal property.
He filed for protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court on Tuesday, the same day defendants were required to respond to a sweeping federal civil lawsuit filed in October by the three exonerated players Nifong falsely accused of rape.
In the October lawsuit, attorneys for the three players accused Nifong, the city of Durham, police investigators and others of conducting "one of the most chilling episodes of premeditated police, prosecutorial and scientific misconduct in modern American history."
+++
Looks like another Democratic race-baiter bites the dust. Too bad for political correctness.
January 16th, 2008 at 7:46 am
Vince,
Couldn't happen to a better guy. Nifong's a scumbag.
Now if only Al Sharpton would receive the same fate as Mike Nifong. Sharpie's never been held accountable for his racial antics, which have even included getting innocent people killed.
January 16th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Roy,
The Clintons are masters of underhanded politics, no doubt. I just don't see it here. I could be wrong, but I think the effect of all this will be the black vote moving toward Obama just in time for the South Carolina primary (50% black). I don't see the white vote moving away from Obama over it. Then, it will all be over and done with for the next rounds of primaries. I see advantage Obama, and therefore, the race card successfully played by Obama. It was quite a stretch to call any of those Clinton comments racist, but even the mention of the word has an impact.
January 16th, 2008 at 8:22 am
"Now if only Al Sharpton would receive the same fate as Mike Nifong. Sharpie's never been held accountable for his racial antics, which have even included getting innocent people killed."
King,
Thank you, thank you, thank you for bringing up how Al Sharpton was responsible for getting innocent people killed.
It was at labout eight people at he Freddy Fashion Mart in Brooklyn where the racist Sharpton inflamed the crowd about the "Jewish interloper" daring to have a store in "the hood," just a few days before the store was torched with the employees inside.
And instead of being held acountable for this and other "antics," what happened to Sharpton? Why, he became a candidate in the Dim presidential primary race in 2004 — a candidate that was fully accepted by the other Dims.
What a party the Dims are. Racists to the right (Sen. Robert KKK Byrd) and racists to the left (Al Sharpton). Throw in the abortion mills, and it's no wonder normal people fleed the party.
January 16th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Too bad this thread went astray.
Think.
The Clintons know they can't possibly overtly bring race into the campaign…..as it would pertain to Barack Obama. So, what do campaigns do when their featured players can't do something? They send surrogates. That's what Karl Rove does. Apparently, the Clinton's do it too.
In addition, the MLKing/Lyndon Johnson comment was not innocent, not one bit….
Very subtle name dropping, to allow for the thought of comparing a black orator to a white president. If you analyze what Hillary said….it makes no sense, face value. It doesn't. M.L.King never ran for president. The comparison doesn't fit at all. Hillary didn't care about that……the main point was to allow for the black/white comparison. Not say it directly….but to allow for it.
This whole ordeal was a calculated meme spread. And it worked as intended…..the media did the phony story replication and…..Voila…..race entered the campaign.
January 17th, 2008 at 8:51 am
This says it all, fro the American Thinker:
January 16, 2008
Obama's 'spiritual mentor' plays the Lewinsky card
Thomas Lifson
The Baltimore Sun reports on the sermon delivered last Sunday by Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jr., the man Barack Obama describes as his "spiritual mentor."
On Sunday morning - amid intensified crossfire between Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Obama over the use of race in the Democratic presidential campaign - Wright was preaching from the Gospel of John, using his powerful style to link the story of the loaves and fishes to a contemporary political message.
"Man should not put limits on what God can do, but that's what people always do, he told the crowd. Just as God made five loaves and two fishes feed thousands, God has provided liberators for blacks in the past - from Nat Turner to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and now Barack Obama. "But," Wright said, "there were always reasons not to follow them."
"Some argue that blacks should vote for Clinton "because her husband was good to us," he continued.
"That's not true," he thundered. "He did the same thing to us that he did to Monica Lewinsky."
Many in the crowd were on their feet, applauding - amazed, amused and moved by the fiery rhetoric of their preacher, who is about to retire.
Truce or no truce, the bitterness evoked by the internal squabble over race in the Democratic Party apparently isn't going away. The irresistible force of the Clinton Machine may have met the immovable object of blacks deciding that the party of race preferences owes the first viable black presidential candidate what it prescribes in other government and private bureaucracies.
Maybe the Democrats will be able to defuse this confrontation. Maybe the Clintons will decide to fold up their tent and let others win. That would be a first. Or maybe Obama will decide that he can wait, although this might encourage the emergence of other black candidates with equally or more polished resumes and actual administrative experience (for example, Newark Mayor Cory Booker). And maybe Rev. Wright and other black advocates will step aside and once again allow the Clintons to put themselves first.
January 17th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
"The irresistible force of the Clinton Machine may have met the immovable object of blacks deciding that the party of race preferences owes the first viable black presidential candidate what it prescribes in other government and private bureaucracies."
The UnAmerican UnThinker is a racist pig. Yeah, that's what I said.
January 17th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Wow, Reverend. Nonsensical and divisive. That's why I like your stuff.
January 17th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
The Dims,
the party of Southern slavery,
the party of Jim Crow laws
the party of filubustering civil rights legislation,
the party of race-baiters (Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc),
the party of quotas & affirmative action,
the party of Sen. Robert (KKK) Byrd, senior Dim in the Senate,
the party of slandering any black that dares not to be a Dim,
the party that keeps blacks chained to the plantation of Government Dependency
By any objective measure, the Dims are the party of racism, and the Dims' use of racism pollutes to political discource in America.
Shame, shame, shame.
So come on you Dims in Akron. Reform your party. Get the racism out of its blood.
January 18th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Reverend,
Vince offers you proof of Obama's pastor overtly playing the race card (no stretching and bending required as with the Clintons), and not only do you NOT recognize it, you even attack the messenger (The American Thinker) for reporting it. Man, that is sad. If you had any credibility to begin with, you lost it all right there.
January 18th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Let me ask you this….
What does Obama's milkman say about this stuff? How about his drycleaner? Let me see…..the kid down the street from the Obamas? One of the guys he went to school with?
Clinton provided the opportunity for her surrogates. Obama reacted.
Ghost: "by any objective measure"…….you're a funny guy.
January 18th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
So come on you Dims in Akron. Reform your party. Get the racism out of its blood
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Rev, I don't know about Obama's milkman or dry cleaner, but that pastor is Obama's MENTOR.
Keep dissembling, but you ain't gonna fool me. I really can't figure out why you even try.