Letters to the Editor
DCLaw1
Published Letters: 839 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Che Pasa
[Read the article: Bill Clinton: The Chris Matthews of South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The comment about Jesse Jackson is only an insult to those who consider being compared to Jackson -- in any context -- insulting, which I do not. It's a wild and inappropriate stretch to presume that there was a racial insult involved in the comment. It's just not there.
Let me explain why it's insulting for Obama to be compared to Jesse Jackson's runs for president in '84 and '88. It has nothing to do with Jackson being "blacker" than Obama, or any other such superficial reason. It is quite simply because Obama is objectively and quantitatively a more credible and popular candidate than was Jesse Jackson, and has gotten to where he is almost entirely without appeals to racial identity or themes that serve as racial identity proxies.
Before the Iowa caucuses, the word being whispered about Obama was whether he could win over the "black vote," due to a fairly significant belief in the African American community that he could not win in the general election by virtue of his race. His decisive win in overwhelmingly white Iowa - for a time, it seemed - put these fears to rest and showed that Obama has very broad appeal across racial and gender lines. If anyone had doubted it before then, the outcome in Iowa showed quite conclusively that Obama was striking notes and accomplishing gains that no other black contender for president ever had.
Considering this context, then, when people like Bill Clinton started intimating that Obama was succeeding in South Carolina for no more than the same limited reasons that Jesse Jackson did, this had the effect - indeed, was designed to have the effect - of marginalizing Obama's skill and broad-based appeal as a candidate, and dismissing his victory in South Carolina as nothing more than the product of racial identification. In turn, it was a sort of "dog whistle" to non-black voters, saying, in effect, "This guy is the champion only of 'black' causes and people; non-blacks should look to another candidate for their interests to be vindicated."
And here's an important point. If Bill Clinton was merely saying that Obama's success was ephemeral and doomed to failure, he could easily have used any other ultimately unsuccessful "insurgent" candidate (like Howard Dean) as a point of comparison to Obama's success. But he didn't. He specifically reached back 20 years and honed in on Jesse Jackson as the measure of Obama's achievement.
For that reason, the tactic could very fittingly be described as Rovian.
-
ginamc - an honest question
[Read the article: Bill Clinton: The Chris Matthews of South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What turned it around for me was the disgusting, disrespectful, insulting Spanish-language ad that Obama ran against Hillary. He NEVER apologized for it -- NEVER. And, I never heard anything significant from the Obama's beloved MSM about this ruthless attack. That is the TRUTH and that is the REAL REASON that so many Latinos turned against Obama.
For the benefit of people such as myself who are not familiar with that ad, could you please describe it for us, in as fair a manner as possible? I'm sincerely interested in hearing what it was in that ad that you think pissed off Latino voters so badly.
I am not trying to bait you, I honestly would like to know.
-
matt thom
[Read the article: Bill Clinton: The Chris Matthews of South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Right after the primary, Hillary's win was chalked up to white people who were a) undereducated and thus, b) unwilling to vote for a black man. Furthermore, the storyline leaving Iowa was a black man winning in a white state. After Nevada it changed to, well, hispanics will not vote for a black man. My point is that race is always going to be a sickeningly convenient storyline and point of analysis... for members of the media, pundits, partisans and campaign advisors.
I certainly don't want to put words in Glenn's mouth in his absence, but I think it's fairly clear from his post that he is emphasizing Bill Clinton's behavior more than that of the media. I do think this distinction is significant.
As I mentioned earlier in comments, the media seizes upon all kinds of absurd possibilities and narratives, often without prompting from any campaign or politician. While it is certainly important to highlight hypocrisy in the media regarding their imputations of racial identity bias, the behavior and words of the actual candidates and their closest surrogates is much more significant, for obvious reasons.
Bill Clinton has one of the biggest megaphones in American politics today. He is a shrewd political thinker and actor, rarely making unintended comments. He is a former President of recent memory. Particularly as the husband of Obama's principle rival, he should know he bears enormous responsibility for what he says.
For that reason, far apart from the media hypocrisy and chatter to which we have grown accustomed, Mr. Clinton's equating Obama's success in South Carolina with those of Jesse Jackson 20 years ago should not be given the benefit of any doubt. Nor should the culpability of Mr. Clinton's remarks be diluted by unfit comparisons to the media's behavior.
-
AKA Smith
[Read the article: Bill Clinton: The Chris Matthews of South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Clinton's supported the suit by the teachers. Obama campaign ran an ad in Spanish that claimed that the Clinton's were trying to keep "our people" from voting.
As it turned out, the tactics of the Culinary Worker's Union backfired because they were too strong arm with their members. Latino votes all across Nevada were heavily for Clinton.
I'm familiar with the Culinary Worker's vs. teachers maneuvering in Nevada, but even with your description of that ad, I'm failing to see what allegedly mortified the Latino voters so badly. Anything else anyone wants to add about the ad?
-
AKA Smith
[Read the article: Bill Clinton: The Chris Matthews of South Carolina]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry, I meant to clarify that I can see how the Culinary Worker's Union strongarming tactics may have backfired, but I'm still wondering about how Obama's ad, specifically, offended Latinos so badly.