Bill Clinton compares Obama to Jesse Jackson

[npincus]

edit: deleting my origianl comment as it had no intent to inflame or offend; let Bill Clinton's words speak for themselves. I don't think CLinton was paying homage to Jackson here, but trying to marginalize Obama as 'the black candidate'. Why bring up Jackson? 'Nuff said.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/bubba-obama-is.html

Said Bill Clinton toda(y in Columbia, SC: "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

This was in response to a question about Obama saying it "took two people to beat him." Jackson had not been mentioned.

Boy, I can't understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as "the black candidate."

[Dogmudgeon]

1. This is racist?

Jackson did, in fact, win SC in the 1980s. And Obama ran a good -- an outstanding -- campaign.

:shrug:

--p!

[jefferson_dem]

2. But the question wasn't about race or black candidates or Jesse Jackson.

The Clinton Camp revealed their agenda clear as day: "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail"

[robbedvoter]

17. What was the question? And why is Jesse jackson - a progressive activist/candidate

disrespected on DU?

[jefferson_dem]

19. Read the OP or go to the blog post.

Red herring.

[H2O Man]

27. Yep.

It is not going to work to try to spin this.

[npincus]

3. it's an obvious effort to marginalize him as 'the black candidate'

by comparing the Obama candidacy to a multi-state wonder who was not a viable national candidate as is Obama. . He's injecting race identity as a means to divide our party. My opinion, and the opinion of many others in our party

[jackson_dem]

7. Jackson wasn't a one-state wonder

He won more than a dozen states, took the delegate lead at one point, and won the whitest state in the country and another state, Alaska, with a very small black population. Most of his wins were in southern states with large black populations where he, as Clinton was trying to indirectly note, racked up Obama-like margins among black voters. Still, he did win other states like Vermont, Alaska, and had a big win in Michigan.

[Dogmudgeon]

12. Exactly

I quibble with only one point --

(Jackson) racked up Obama-like margins among black voters.

Lots of white people voted for Jesse Jackson. He was incredibly popular, but did not maintain momentum.

--p!
A Jackson voter "back in the day".

[jackson_dem]

20. I know. Obama has gotten a lot of white support too

But Jackson's margins for his numerous southern wins came from Obama-like margins among black voters. It is true and often ignored, especially by those hyping Obama as the first "real" black candidate, that Jackson won plenty of white votes. You don't win Vermont and Alaska without doing that!

[Gloria]

34. Jackson was talking about economic justice.....

On MLK's birthday, I heard one of the older guard of black activists in a discussion (not on network, lordy no!) talking about how issues changed..that it wasn't about race per se now, but more about economic justice and class. He reminded the viewer that by the time of MLK's death, he was being vilified because of his anti-war stance and message about economic justice. He had moved beyond "I have a dream"....It is quite telling that Jackson Sr. hasn't offered enthusiastic support to Obama and MLK III has told Edwards to stay in the contest.

Obama nor Hillary are on that page, but John is. Looks like a lot of people are shooting themselves in the foot at this point. They're going for image and stolen words which mask people who have been leading in the garnering of corporate money. And condescendingly say that people should have a seat or two at the table dominated by corporate friends so that we can all "negotiate." (that's Obama).

[Dogmudgeon]

11. But how is it *racist*?

It requires that, in order to avoid racism, the world has to ignore all Black people. That would be absolute racism. It would be lose-lose for everybody.

Plus, I think Barack Obama has proven that the color of one's skin really is secondary to the content of one's character -- once and for all, I hope. He has avoided the marginalization previous Black candidates (in our age, Jackson and Chisholm) have struggled under.

I think Bill was trying to point out that Jackson kicked some serious ass in SC but still lost the primary election. I have also done so this morning, in the context of pointing out that it is too early to take a victory lap.

Jesse Jackson was, like Obama, a history-maker, affecting more issues than only racially-involved ones. The Rainbow Coalition had effects that lasted well into the 1990s and its legacy continues today.

I do not recall the '84 or the '88 primaries as being racially charged at all, as hard as the press tried, though Jackson was quite a formidable campaigner, and he was not considered mainstream, but was marginalized.

--p!

[npincus]

23. is playing racial-politics racist?

Clinton knows exactly what he was doing. I don't believe the Clintons are racist but will say/do anything to squash their opponent, and if that means turning a viable mainstream candidate into a Jesse Jackson who was not.

My opinion.

[Dogmudgeon]

30. I don't begrudge you your opinion, not one bit

But I am mystified as to how, and why, so many innocuous things are turned into proof of alleged racism. It has become a charge that is impossible to deny, like "have you stopped beating your wife".

I thought the same thing when I saw the numbers; I consider myself a Clinton partisan, but it would not take much to turn me into an Obama partisan. In the 80s, when I was pro-Jackson, I didn't even consider his race as the primary reason for voting for him; I supported the Rainbow Coalition, and still do.

If the Clintons really are true to the oft-repeated "meme" -- that they "will say/do anything to squash their opponent" -- they would be playing MUCH rougher. Among the candidates themselves, this primary is about as vicious as a slap-fight at a slumber party. It is WE who are fighting with sharpened knives.

--p!

[pampango]

41. The poster specifically stated a belief that the Clintons are not racists, so

why are you accusing him/her of alleging racism. The poster's point was that they will do/say anything to further Hillary's chances. Bill could have compared Obama to Edwards of 2004 (won the SC primary but not the nomination), but he chose to use a Jackson comparison. It could have been an innocent mistake on Bill's part, with no partisan motive, or it could have been a calculated reference. You can easily take as a conscious tactic.

[wellstone dem]

47. He could as easily have said,

that Obama won SC as Edwards won it last time around. At least then we could speculate that maybe Hilary wants Obama to run for VP.

Bill is smart. He knew what he was doing. We like him because he is smart, but we twist ourselves into knots to give an innocent explanation for his comment. He is smart enough to have avoided this comment if the innocent meaning was the true one.

[DangerDave921]

28. Oh come on

You really think there wasn't any racial message behind Bill's comment??? Of course there was. He could just as easiy have pointed to any other candidate in history -- ANY candidate -- who won the SC primary but didn't get the nomination, if that was his sole point. And yet he focused on one: Jesse Jackson. The message is clear: "Sure, a black man can win South Carolina but it's pretty easy for a black man to win that state. I mean, look at Jesse Jackson, and we all know how that turned out."

Absolutely despicable comment. Truly and utterly racially motivated.

[Dogmudgeon]

35. Jackson won by a BIGGER margin in 1988 than Obama did

I do not believe that any other Democrats have won by such margins in SC in the last 50 to 100 years (though I could be wrong since I have not consulted a source on the history of SC politics). So it has been Obama and Jackson. I myself pointed this out a few hours ago, before the numerous Bill-is-a-racist threads got going. It was a natural parallel to draw, and for reasons other than race.

The point: Jackson won big in '88 (and '84). Obama has won by a similar margin. Jackson lost the nomination, and having participated in the '88 election to a small degree, I never saw one bit of racism among the candidates (and, yes, I voted for JLJ). Jackson simply lost momentum. Obama would be wise to learn from that mistake.

If Bill Clinton so much as sneezes, people say he's a racist. I think a lot of people are seeing racism because they WANT to see racism. Believe me, there is plenty of racism still around, and if Obama wins the nomination, you will see more racism than you thought you could stand.

--p!

[DangerDave921]

42. Willfully blind

Sorry, but your reasoning is really suspect. I'm not saying Clinton is a racist. No such thing. But in this case, he is clearly trying to send a message to the voters that Obama is a marginal candidate, a "black" candidate, or however you want to term it. He's trying to draw a parallel of losing between the past black candidate and the current one. There is no other reason to inject Jesse into his answer.

[Essene]

31. Race BAITING, not racism per se

Clinton is making an analogy to a previously LOOSING black candidate (who's name has negative connotations today).

There are others who won in SC but lost the race... who Clinton could have mentioned. Nope, the point is that Clinton is trying to clearly make Obama into the "black" candidate... to marginalize both him and the black vote.

And let me repeat that last point.

He's marginalizing the black vote. He's actually casting them aside to exploit their growing support of Obama, but painting Obama as a one-dimensional candidate.

The sad thing is this is all being done because the Clintons either:

1) think blacks will rally around Hillary once she wins the primaries
2) don't care about the black vote and just want to win

Either way, what was once a very strong bond and affinity has been destroyed. Blacks are silently rejecting this all.

[Dogmudgeon]

45. Who's baiting who?

(I've replied to a few other replies, so you might want to check out the points I made.) The wins of Jackson in 88 and Obama last night are, indeed, the largest wins in SC in a long time, as far as I know.

It appears that any mention of Black people in politics has now become a form of racism or race baiting. That just doesn't make sense. It should be permitted for anyone to speak of their concerns. The fact that two African Americans triumphed in a state notorious for its bigotry is remarkable. And it is also part of Democratic party history.

Close to 90% of the race threads here are initiated by Obama supporters. The common secondary theme is "the Clintons will do anything to win". I call bullshit -- the behavior of the candidates during the primary has been quite tame. I've followed politics since 1968, and this year ain't nothin'. Even most of the big-name surrogates (with the big exception of Clinton supporter Andrew Cuomo -- I think there was a pro-Hillary BET exec who also shot his mouth off) have been reserved. A lot of people are seeing racism because they are on an emotional knife-edge from the intensity of their interest in this election. And if Bill is, in fact, race-baiting, he will fail, because very few Democrats are voting for Obama because he's Black. Obama's win in SC way have been weighted toward Black voters, but it cut across all demographic lines.

They are two (actually, with JRE, three) outstanding candidates. But, as I said above, it is WE who are rumbling hard. And if the Clintons were, indeed, willing to do anything, they would be playing MUCH rougher.

We are very lucky to have such an embarrassment of riches in our party. We ought not to sour this sweet moment in history, any of us.

--p!

[Kahuna]

4. Didn't Hillary pledge during the NV debate to leave gender and

race out of the campaigns? Well, so much for that. (not that I ever believed her in the first place)

[jackson_dem]

8. Did they pledge not to look at demographics?

What Clinton was saying is Obama's win was a result of the same reason Jackson won those times: very high black support. Obama was third among whites but at 81% among blacks. Race was not a factor? Please. 81% of blacks and 76% of whites voted their color. Whether he did this to downplay Obama's win or to paint him as "the black candidate" is open to debate.

[Essene]

29. Race baiting, not racist...the Clintons continue to push the media to frame things on racial terms

Using very slick and subtle things like this.

Black voters noticed this... but yet many whites refuse to call it like it is... and the fear mongering about the "black candidate" is likely to destroy Obama in the end.

[thoughtcrime1984]

64. You are correct in your assertion

that the Clintons are subtly race-baiting. It will be their downfall, not only because of black people being turned off by their tactics, but whites, latinos, asians, and all other minorities as well. We're not as dumb as they think we are, as we can see through them like a window.

[lligrd]

5. Comparing Obama To Jackson Is Like Comparing Clinton To Bush

There is no comparison.

[robbedvoter]

16. Jesse Jackson is a progressive guy - so Obama would be the Bush in that simile, non?

[EFerrari]

6. Who is advising the Clintons, anyway? That person should be fired

immediately.

[GalleryGod]

13. Start with Nasty Mandy Grunwald...

Watch "The War Room"

[mod mom]

26. I'm starting to worry that Clinton is working to divide the party intentionally &

not just to support his wife but to aid the GOP if she doesn't win.

[EFerrari]

59. It looks like they are being advised, ahem, to suppress the Obama turnout.

That's inherently divisive, isn't it?

I didn't post any but there are about 50 stories out there about voter registration being huge and turnout we have seen is huge, too. So, whoever is advising the Clintons is an idiot to try to go against this tidal wave of participation.

Who knows what goes on in Bill Clinton's mind. What he's doing looks destructive to me -- to his image to his wife's campaign, to our primary race.

[bidenista]

9. cough

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4163402

[DiscussTed]

10. Good call N/T

[robbedvoter]

14. A compliment in my book. And in Bill's too, I am sure.

But I am not surprised that some Obama supporters feel "outraged"

[lastliberalintexas]

58. Or an insult to Jackson

If anyone should take offense at the comparison, it should be Jesse. (so sayeth the proud Jackson supporter of 1988 :) )

[ShaneGR]

15. So its racist to compare Obama to other leading black candidates?

Just wondering.

[mckeown1128]

24. It is when you see a theme.

This is just like when people say that we can't nominate Obama because he wont win because Harold Ford Jr. couldn't win. When called on the comparison they say that they weren't comparing them because they are black but because they are moderates(which of course is BS since Obama isn't moderate.)

The jackson comparison is an attempt to say that Obama will only do well amoung black voters. Which is a racist argument. Obama pulls voters from ALL demographics...the Clintons want people to think that Obama doesn't.

[ShortnFiery]

43. Yes, the theme is a racist argument and shamelessly *overt* for The Clintons ...

Their status within the African American Community (and those who are open-minded enough not to view them "GODS") is tanking like a lead balloon. And rightly so.

Further, don't discount the fact that those "little brown people" (Latinos) that The Clintonian DLC believes that they have in their pocket due to endorsements, especially of the Labor Variety, can turn on a dime. :evilgrin:

Any politician who is willing to RACE BAIT does not give give a damn about Civil Rights.

The Clintons are finally receiving what they deserve. All those years of steadfastly defending them against their "mean ole detractors" are moot.

With regard to "The Clinton-Bush" Executive Branch turnstile, what IF it's not all JUST irrational CLINTON (or BUSH)- HATE? Both families have EARNED the resentment of the other party's faithful as well as, when they overstay their welcome, the IRE of the Party Base.

The Corporate Clintonian DLC presently has a stranglehold over OUR Democratic Party. Tell me, which Democratic Presidential Nominee has NOT either enjoyed the last name "Clinton" - or - has been someone ANOINTED by the DLC since 1992? ANSWER: Zero. :wow: It's time to shag these Corporate bastards out of OUR DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERSHIP. :thumbsup:

That is, no matter how many times you repeat it, you can no longer put lipstick on the POLITICAL PIGS who are known by the last names of "BUSH or CLINTON."

[okasha]

54. Jackson pulled voters from all demographics, too.

I voted for him back in the day and still admire him tremendously, despite his very human flaws. He was at the forefront of the movement for racial and economic equality when a civil rights activist was likely to wind up with a 6'x3' piece of public property, not a $2 million McMansion.

Come to think of it, Big Dawg's wrong. Obama ain't no Jesse Jackson.

[VotesForWomen]

66. the 'theme' is in our head, but nevermind. nt

[zulchzulu]

18. Bill Clinton has proven to me to be an enemy of the Democratic Party

It's all about him.

It's all about what young women he can stalk and victimize.

It's all about how he takes the Republican Playbook, adds some Clinton ejaculation to it and then passes the legislation.

We've gotten NAFTA, China free trade, the Telecommunications Act, a million innocent Iraqis dead with the No-Fly Zone policy, the homophobic Defense of Marriage Act, rampant deregulatory "advances", the international embarrassment of his plotting and sexual conquest of an intern that tarnished the American Presidency, the lies, the triangulation, the scandal upon scandal and the legacy where Democrats have to defend his actions.

Bill can't get his ass kicked without making a cheap shot denegrating Obama's clear successes to Jesse Jackson's campaign, which had a fraction of support that Obama has.

Bill feels the need to try to destroy Obama's chances because it appears he wants to get back into the White House again so he can get his hands on more innocent interns and stomp all over the rest of his wife's administration because he's the biggest know-it-all.

I'm glad the Hillaryworld campaign is going to continue to keep him barking like a rapid dog on the campaign trail. What damage he did to the Hillaryworld campaign in South Carolina is the perfect solution to finally show this psychopath the exit door.

[TwilightGardener]

50. Bill is a capable and intelligent man, but Bill is 100% for Bill, you're right.

Always has been, always will be. His political support for his wife is just an extension of that principle.

[robbedvoter]

21. I marched with Jesse Jackson in 2000 to recount the votes in Florida

Obama is "disappointed Floridians's votes don't count, but tough..."
I wish Obama would be half the man jesse is. But them MSM(+Rush) wouldn't prop him so (for now)

[B Calm]

22. So you saying all those blacks who came out yesterday and voted, wasn't

doing it as a race factor? Take your fucking racism somewhere else!

[ShortnFiery]

25. Lee Atwater would be proud of The Clintonian DLC attack dog "Bubba"

:puke:

Bill Clintons ugly "racism" is coming out. The Clintons have always feigned empathy for the African American Community. How sad, it was all a ruse. :thumbsdown:

[dogman]

33. And he would be proud the Clinton-hating attack machine is alive and well at DU.

EOM

[ShortnFiery]

36. No, he's 100% with Hill and Bill. That is quite telling given the proven Conservative (racism)

ole pat proves in his minority bashing statements time and time again. :thumbsdown:

[dogman]

40. Bullshit!

The racism issue was fabricated by the MSM and Clinton haters to divide the Democrats. You didn't see it raised in Iowa, where it would have had a different effect.

[Gloria]

32. Lest we forget, only a few short months ago.....

Seems to me many are forgetting way back when during the time of Oprah in SC and the huge stadium rallies…
There was much discussion of how she spoke…she dropped her normal speech and launched into “Southern preacher” mode, totally out of her usual speech (not a movie role). Many wondered about this “act” and whether THIS was playing a race card!! Remember??? Guess not.....

Aside: now I hear she's praising the New Deal on her show. Funny, I don't see her candidate, grabbing all the corporate money he can get, exactly supporting the New Deal....

[ShortnFiery]

37. Too funny! And Hill ceaselessly plays up "the sisters" - I'm talking about *racism* not ethnicity

gender politics. There's a big difference and you know it. :eyes:

[totodeinhere]

38. This is proof positive that Clinton is playing the race card.

What he means is that we should discount Obama's win in S.C. because after all, it was just black people voting for Obama.

Bill Clinton knows no shame.

[PATRICK]

39. Jesse also won NY

He might have done better not to bring up the comparison at all. Jesse tried to broaden his base of support and in a lackluster field did very well in NY when disgruntlement against getting stuck with Dukakis was running very high. A very motivated base, a lot of past experience including Jackson's victory, an even broader and more competitive appeal than Jackson and suddenly the home state where many Dems who elected her would rather choose someone else is again in play.

I would guess Obama has a greater appeal and serious chance than Jesse had and will need it against a popular home state incumbent with much of the state machinery in the bag.

[Mudoria]

44. I think the point President Clinton was making

was that a black candidate won SC and it amounted to nothing for that candidate as far as winning the Democratic nomination. But, spin away!!

[ShortnFiery]

48. is OVERTLY (not even thinly veiled) *racist.* That's clear to most objective people.

But continue to place them in Olympus and view The Clintons as "Gods." Now that's not only SPIN but highly DELUSIONAL-type behavior.

Come into the light?

[Meshuga]

46. Clinton is doing the work for the republicans if Obama wins the nomination

The only thing that matters to him is getting his wife in the White House at ALL COSTS. Thanks a lot Bill Clinton!

[CreekDog]

49. Bill's intention could have been innocuous, but that doesn't matter now does it?

It's a postmodernist world where what folks believe you meant is more important than what you said. But successful politicians all use that to their advantage all the time, so they can't really call foul when it goes against them.

In short, Bill Clinton shouldn't have said what he said, it boomeranged on him, whether he meant to do it or not, he was playing with fire and he and Hillary got burned.

[TwilightGardener]

52. The comment was deliberate. No one was talking about Jesse Jackson, in

any context, anywhere. When it became clear that no one would bring that topic up so that he could use it to remind folks that black candidates ultimately go nowhere, he decided to go ahead and insert it into his remarks anyway. Transparent, and shameful.

[BootinUp]

51. Politicians in competition trying to marginalize each other?

The horror, lol.

I thought this was just a game. /sarcasm

[TwilightGardener]

53. Would be great if they marginalized each other on the basis of

records and policies--not so great to try to marginalize someone on the basis of race. Sorry, that type of "win" makes everyone lose.

[BootinUp]

55. This whining is getting so boring

welcome to politics.

[TwilightGardener]

56. I have no problem with politics, until it damages racial relations within

the Dem party. A lot of blacks felt disgruntled towards the Clintons yesterday. That's not good.

[BootinUp]

57. Think about this

the first black man with a shot at the big one, and you are surprised people are reacting this way? As I have said elsewhere it was in the cards as soon as the race being competitive to this level. Obama attempts to frame the Clintons negatively everyday, their integrity, their ability to bring people together. This is politics, I say to black people who feel slighted, welcome to the championship match. Lets get on with it.

[tabatha]

61. I have only heard Obama

a) talk about differences in policies
b) respond to what they have said about him, such as "fairy tale" "false hopes"

where has he said anything about them personally?

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

60. It's pretty darn transparent. But you go, Bill, you trench warrior politician, you!

[yardwork]

62. That's my reaction, too.

[loveangelc]

63. Unbelievable.

The question was "why does it take 2 of you to defeat him" and he brings up how Jesse Jackson won in SC. Lets give an answer that has nothing to do with the question and make him "the black candidate."

I think this was before the SC primary, so hopefully Bill Clinton can stick a fork (or cigar) in it now and shut up.

[VotesForWomen]

65. clintons can't say one word without being accused of racism. nt