If Clinton had used Edwards instead of Jackson as his example...

[MonkeyFunk]

would it have gone unnoticed?

No fucking way. We'd have fifty threads here blasting him for attacking BOTH candidates at once.

It's manufactured outrage, and it will occur whatever he does. The right-wing were masters of it in the 90s, and it's sad to see the legacy still going here.

[FrenchieCat]

1. Hide-a-thread

is my friend!

[MonkeyFunk]

2. I'm not a bit surprised to

see you avoid the merits of the topic.

[Maddy McCall]

3. So is "kick"

:eyes:

[Maribelle]

31. It sure is.

:spray:

[Egnever]

4. When taken by itself its not that big of a deal

When it comes on the heals of a litany of comments about obamas race or insinuations about his race it appears to be a strategy.

Clinton is not an idiot he is well aware of what he is doing and has been doing it for a while now. Each comment in and of itself is fairly Innocent sounding. The first one can surely be dismissed the second forgiven by the third or fourth it becomes a pattern and an ugly one at that.

[aquart]

14. Well, Obama is not an idiot either. He took the risk and it paid off handsomely.

But "fairy tale" is not racist. This outrage was manufactured by Obama's campaign to get Hillary and sexism and sympathy for her off the news.

And it worked BRILLIANTLY.

Yet you refuse to take credit for a scheme which could only benefit one candidate? Don't be silly. Come on. Come on, Obama's supporters. Step up and take a bow.

[Egnever]

19. no fairy tale was not racist

it was just bullshit.

[karynnj]

30. Actually the fairy tale comment was clever and disgusting

Many people went off on the use of the word "fairy tale", which in a way was a distraction. There was far less attention given to the actual charges made - which HRC has sense repeated. (Easier for her to do as it confirms something in the back of people's minds.)

Those charges were:
1) Obama wasn't firm on voting against the IWR
2) Obama was "close to Bush" in 2004 on what to do going forward.

Obama was against the war and said so at the time in extremely strong words. It made sense for him to diffuse a question in 2004 that as he didn't know what was in the intelligence, he didn't know how he would have voted. As Kerry said, Obama wanted to avoid a sound bite that could have hurt the campaign. It was a generous thing to do. Kerry does know where Obama was in 2004 - as they met before he was picked to do the keynote speech.

Clinton then went on and said that Obama had said in July 2004 that his position on Iraq was similar to Bush. The full paragraph showed that he was saying he was similar to Bush in the goal of leaving a stable Iraq, but his position on how to get it was entirely different and like Kerry's supported intense regional diplomacy. In fact, in 2004, his position of what to do going forward was like Kerry's, which the media later mentioned were like what the Iraq Study Group recommended - which was not what the Bush administration has done to this day. (This is the same place Dean was on what to do going forward.)

This is distortion that Rove would be proud of.

[pampango]

20. That's why Ted is upset with Bill - because Obama is the one who played the "race card."

Is that how it works? (Perhaps Ted is buying into the "MSM spin"?)

For Obama to win the nomination he has to do well with white voters. Anyone does. It's a simple numbers game and is one reason why Jackson and Sharpton never won the nomination.

For Obama to "brilliantly" recast himself as a BLACK candidate, after proving his ability to appeal to white voters in 98% white Iowa, would imply that his idea was to employ the "Jackson/Sharpton" strategy to winning the nomination. "Brilliant" would not be the term I would use to describe such a strategy. If Obama did that he deserves the same electoral fate that Jackson and Sharpton met.

"Brilliant" might more aptly be used to describe the adversary of the candidate who was being recast as this year's Jackson or Sharpton. If successful, the "new, BLACK" Obama might win in SC, but would lose the nomination, as did Jesse and Al.

[sandnsea]

5. Well golly gee whiz kind sir

He didn't use John Edwards as an example and that's the entire point.

[MonkeyFunk]

6. and gee whillikers

my point is that if he HAD used John Edwards as an example, there'd be just as much manufactured outrage. You guys will attack him no matter WHAT he says.

[sandnsea]

7. nonsense

There have been all sorts of back and forths between Clinton and Edwards that nobody has paid a bit of attention to.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=clinton+says+edwards&btnG=Google+Search

[MonkeyFunk]

10. But this would've been about

Clinton, Obama AND Edwards. You guys wouldn't be able to resist.

[sandnsea]

12. Edwards says Clinton "has no conscience"

Edwards said Clinton said there's more about Rezko

Edwards says Clinton and Obama are flawed candidates

Edwards says Clinton is pushing coke story

There's all kinds of garbage out there that the candidates have said.

Bill Clinton, however, is race baiting.

[dkf]

8. If Bill Clinton had said John Edwards instead of Jackson

we wouldn't even know he had said it.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. of course you would

somebody, somewhere on the internet would have reported it, and one of the many scour-trolls who spend hours every day searching every obscure corner of the 'net to find something negative about Clinton would've reported it here, and made up some good old fashioned outrage over the whole thing.

[dkf]

11. Well we need to agree to disagree then...

[TheDonkey]

13. WHY did he mention Jackson?

Hmmmmmm. That was some 2 decades ago.... any reason or was that the first name that came to mind?

[MonkeyFunk]

15. Yes

because it was the better example.

[Tatiana]

16. You will never convince me that using Jackson was not strategy on Bill's part.

It was strategy, as Pat Buchanan hinted at on MSNBC but didn't come out and fully explain.

Associate Obama with Jesse Jackson, a man white southern voters don't like and don't trust and watch Obama struggle when the race moves to states where African-Americans are not as influential. Only I think this will backfire, as any white males that Obama loses will not move to Hillary, but Edwards.

[MonkeyFunk]

17. but South Carolina voters liked Jackson a lot

he won there twice!

[Tatiana]

18. I should have said it was long-term strategy for future contests in southern states

like Alabama, Tennesee, and Oklahoma.

[VotesForWomen]

21. absolutely true; they can't say anything without hysteria breaking loose. nt

[bowens43]

22. Bill Clinton said basically that Obama only won SC because he's black

There is nothing manufactured about this outrage, it was earned. Clinton was my favorite president and now I see him acting in a way that confirms many of the things the republicans have said about him over the years. Bill and Hillary care only about power and they will do or say anything to get it. This is obvious to anyone who looks at it objectively. Bill and Hillary learned well from the right, they are carrying on the legacy of that they fought against for 8 years.

[MonkeyFunk]

23. and I disagree that that's what he said.

Anytime you have to say "BASICALLY, what he said was..." it means you're rephrasing it through your own views.


People who don't like the Clintons are inclined to interpret everything they say in the worst possible light.

I simply don't see it. He also continued that sentence to say that Jackson ran two great campaigns, and that Obama was a great candidate, running a great campaign.

[flordehinojos]

24. and ... as i posted in another thread ...

what is wrong with obama admitting to, yes there are similarities between the Jesse Jackson '84 and "88 campaigns in SC but let me point you to where there are differences too."

jesse jackson cannot deny that he is a black man and neither can obama (at least his skin is so). admitting to that fact and not getting bogged down in it would make him a whole lot less black than he makes himself by wanting to appear as if he is not.

obama likes to bicker about anything that doesn't go his way, anything that is true, and he is turning out to be, just like bush, a cry baby about just anything.

[flpoljunkie]

25. BUT HE DID-UNT!

You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube!

[karynnj]

26. Actually there would not be 50 threads

The Edwards people would likely have no problem with it - as it states fact that says nothing bad about Edwards- Edwards did win South Carolina with a 15 point margin in 2004. He then did not win another state until after Kerry had it sewn up. I have never seen any defensiveness on the part of the Edwards people or any suggests that losing the nomination reflected badly on him.

The Obama people might have a few threads pointing out that unlike Edwards, he beat his opponent in Iowa and was only 2 points behind in NH. In NV, even with all the dirty tricks he was only 5 points behind, while winning the delegate battle. Then there are the national numbers by SC in 2004, Kerry was the prohibitive favorite in the national polls - over 60% in some, always over 50% and the trend was still in his favor. While HRC is still the front runner, her lead has been far more fluid and it is clear there is much more of a race left.

An argument over numbers is not as nasty as the ones that occurred because Jackson was mentioned.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. and, as I said,

I truly believe the Jackson brouhaha is entirely manufactured. Therefore, whatever he would've said would've caused a ruckus.

[robbedvoter]

28. Except Jackson is a real progressive, hence a compliment. he won 11 states

not just one like Edwards did. So, I dunno.
Of course, Edwards is running now, and using his past would have seen as rubbing it in, while Jackson - is just some history about SC primaries.

[MonkeyFunk]

29. yep

and he continued his thought by saying very complimentary things about both Jackson and Obama. But nobody cares about that.

[Jai4WKC08]

32. Of for cryin' out loud... listen to the original question people

Bill Clinton was asked whether getting so much of the black vote would hurt Obama. He answered no, and used Jesse Jackson as an example. WTF else should he have said?

It's the media, stupid.

(not directed at you, MonkeyFunk)