Clinton Says Obama Playing Racial Politics

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton accused Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign of fanning the flames of racial politics and said that he has not yet been held to account for his record on the war in Iraq.

Several prominent African Americans have voiced concern about statements by Clinton and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, the day before the New Hampshire primary.

Sen. Clinton (N.Y.) said in a sometimes testy appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," that the controversy is an "unfortunate story line that the Obama campaign has pushed very successfully."

Clinton had appeared to some to demean the leadership of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights era when she told Fox News last Monday, "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ... [I]t took a president to get it done."

And former president Clinton said at Dartmouth College the same day about Obama, "This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen." After some complained, Clinton said that he was referring only to Obama's Iraq record and not his candidacy.

The Clintons moved Friday to soothe ruffled feathers but, when asked Sunday about the Monday comments, Clinton pointed blame at Obama's campaign. "They've been putting out talking points. They've been telling this in a very selective way," Clinton said. "I'm glad to have the opportunity to set the facts straight."

"Dr. King didn't just give speeches," Clinton said. He understood "he had to move the political process and bring in those who were in political power. ... He wanted somebody in the White House who would act," she said.

Clinton said her husband's comments focused on the story line of Obama's campaign -- a speech he gave in 2002, as a state senator in Illinois, in which he opposed the war in Iraq. "He gave a very impassioned speech against it and consistently said that he was against the war, he would vote against the funding for the war," she said. "By 2003, that speech was off his Web site. By 2004, he was saying that he didn't really disagree with the way George Bush was conducting the war. And by 2005, 6, and 7, he was voting for $300 billion in funding for the war. The story of his campaign is really the story of that speech and his opposition to Iraq. I think it is fair to ask questions about it."

"How do you translate your words into deeds?" she added later. "I think it is fair to point out that he has no record of actually producing positive change."

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the 2004 nominee who endorsed Obama last week, said Obama has the necessary qualities to "inspire and to be a president."

Kerry defended Obama's youth and relative inexperience, saying on ABC's "This Week," "He's older than Bill Clinton when Bill Clinton became president."

Clinton would not say whether she feels Obama has the experience to be president.

"That is up for voters to decide," she said.

Clinton also addressed her emotional display the day before the New Hampshire primary, in which her eyes appeared to well with tears and her voice broke as she described how she copes with the stresses of the campaign. Critics thought it was staged; some thought that it handed her the primary.

"It was a moment of real emotional connection," Clinton said. She said politicians are "also human beings."

Clinton said that she did not consider the troop surge to be anything more than a narrow military success and that, as president, she still planned to ask her generals to withdraw troops with 60 days.

"Part of the reason that Iraqis are doing anything is they see this election," she said. "They know that the blank check that George Bush gave them is about to be torn up."

Clinton said she has no idea whether the "vast right-wing conspiracy" she once accused of trying to destroy her husband's presidency still exists. And when asked what her biggest public adversity has ever been, she responded, "I think we all know that."

Edwards 'Running Hard' in South Carolina

John Edwards, Kerry's running mate in the 2004 election, said he didn't hear from Kerry before the Obama endorsement but was not surprised by it.

Edwards, on CNN's "Late Edition," reiterated his pledge to continue his campaign "through the convention."

"Are we running hard in South Carolina? Yes, we are running very hard here. I mean, this is the place that I was born. It is a place where I expect to do well," Edwards said. "And it is a place where I understand what is happening in people's lives in a very personal way."

Romney, Giuliani Confident of Upcoming Victories

Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney both said they expected to win upcoming Republican primaries in critical states for them. Giuliani has staked much of his campaign on a win in Florida on Jan. 29, while Romney faces a big test on Tuesday in Michigan, where his father was governor.

Romney said he would be more confident of winning if only Republicans and independents could vote in the primary. "There will be Democrats that come in the race. Maybe some of them will vote for me, because they will remember what my dad did for Michigan and how he helped turn it around," he said.

Asked if he had to win in Florida, Giuliani replied on "Fox News Sunday," "I don't think any candidate would ever say 'have to,' " but if you want me to say it's real important ... it's real important."

Giuliani was quizzed about his position on illegal immigration: Millions of immigrants who now are illegally in the United States but have not committed a crime here would not have to leave the country before becoming citizens.

"They would have to get on the back of the line. They couldn't get ahead of anyone else. They would have to pay fines. And then at the end of the road, anyone on any of these lists would have to be able to read English, write English, speak English. There would be substantial things that had to be done," Giuliani said, and he dismissed the label "amnesty." "Amnesty is being free and clear of all penalties of any kind," Giuliani said.

Romney and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee clashed over their economic records, appearing on CBS's "Face the Nation" and CNN's "Late Edition." Huckabee portrayed Romney as an out-of-touch businessman, and Romney accused Huckabee of being a tax-hiker.

Romney said Huckabee raised taxes by $500 million as governor and called his resistance to admit that he raised taxes "disingenuous."

Huckabee said it's "almost sad to watch him make these kind of claims. He raised over half a billion dollars of fees in his own state. And he says, well, those aren't taxes."

"I hate to say poor Mitt, because a man with that much wealth is hardly poor anything," he added.

Huckabee ripped Romney's background as someone who oversaw leveraged buyouts.

"There are a lot of people who lost their jobs when his company would take over, restructure a company, lay a lot of people off. A lot of times, the CEOs and the people at the top got some pretty huge bonuses and made a lot of money. A lot of people went home without a pension and a paycheck," Huckabee said.

Romney suggested that criticism sounded to him like demagoguery.

"It has been said for a long time, you don't help the wage-earner by attacking the wage-payer. And this kind of divisive, populist approach is like he is channeling John Edwards," Romney said.

By Post Editor |  January 13, 2008; 2:03 PM ET
Previous: Romney Dismisses McCain's Electability | Next: Giuliani Shifts Emphasis From Security to Economy

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Your headline, "Clinton Says Obama Playing Racial Politics," is either misleading or insufficiently supported by the substance of the article. Please explain WHY Clinton believes that Obama is playing the race card. All your article does is make an assertion that she has said this. It then goes on to talk about some possibly insensitive comments made by the Clinton campaign, and about their criticisms of Obama's Iraq voting. Would you please expound upon the assertion that Clinton says Obama is playing the race card. If anything, your article supports the opposite conclusion.

Posted by: Josh Stern | January 13, 2008 3:06 PM

Why is it when any one criticizes Obama on any of his fabrications, he brings up race. Is this his most intelligent reply ?

Posted by: gatorsn2008 | January 13, 2008 4:44 PM

Black versus white. Up to now I wondered whether I lived in the United States. I now feel comfortable that I am still living in the same country I was born. Still one can dream that things have changed. What we do have is more latency and hidden problems. I guess that is what they mean by change. We have a change in style.

Posted by: Arthur Gittleman | January 13, 2008 6:00 PM

Clintons [Hillary and Bill] will do anything and everything to capture our White House. Such divisive politics is dangerous and would backfire on Clintons. Clintons have forgotten issue of Monica Lewisnky disgrace of presidency in Oval Office, Bill's conserted womanising with Jenniffer Flowers, Whitewater scandal, Bills's investigation by Special Counsel, his impeachment, obstruction of justice, and loss of his law license, and more.
If OBAMA attacks Clintons with these, I am sure Hillary would cry much more, while Bill will again deny these never happened,
or another fairy tale. WHAT A SHAME. SHAME ON CLINTONS. You will not have my vote. Hillary is now playing race card with bill.
That does not seat well with AfricanAmerican community. The south is no longer "your country", but OBAMA COUNTRY.
You have taken black votes for granted for too long. Whether your swipe of OBAMA is about Iraqi war, broken economy, Health care, or any other topic, you crossed the line of gentlemen/women pilitics. Bill and Hillary Clintons will forever be remembered
as the couple that indecent, and incapable of telling the truth. Both Clintons are of old generation, thus cannot understand the voice of AMERICA- AMERICA WANTS CHANGE, AND WE WILL HAVE CHANGE. If by some mistake, Hillary Clinton wins nomination, I will vote Republican/independent regardless of who wins GOP nomination.
Out of desperation, you CLINTONS have insulted our hero - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. That is irreparable. We have fought, made laws, changed our constitution, soaked our votes in blood, only for desperate Clintons to tell us those things do not matter. I wish I can meet both of you face to face for further questioning. You have a lot of explaining to do.

Posted by: PRINCE ANYAKORA | January 13, 2008 7:42 PM

ADDENDUM Our hero, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. died for the DREAM and that is the HOPE and CHANGE OBAMA takes about, and that is not a fairy tale. Clintons have further just lost lost the remains of legacy Clintons have.
I guess Clintons are so lost that they also lost the theme of campaign.
YOU DO NOT INSULT A LEGEND AND BE REGARDED AS PERSONS NOT HAVING MENTAL BANKRUPTCY. Here, Clintons crossed the line of decency in politics.

Posted by: PRINCE ANYAKORA | January 13, 2008 8:12 PM

The BS here is palpable. If you listen to the full context of what the Clintons actually said, rather than the little snippets printed here, there is absolutely nothing racial about it.

This is all spin started by Donna Brazille (an Obama supporter) on The Situation Room. Once she said it offended her as an "African American", Obama's minions came out in full force all over TV and started accusing the Clintons of being racists.

Well, guess what? As a white person, I'm offended by all of this - Let's see... we have Jesse Jackson, Jr. saying Hillary didn't cry for Katrina victims, Oprah going to SC and inciting older black voters by bringing up fire hoses and dogs, Obama doing the same himself today at a church in LA, Rep. Clyburn telling Clinton to back-off Obama or he'll endorse him, and Obama refusing to even comment on all of it. Why? Because it's getting him the black vote in SC. Who's racist?


Oh and let's not mention that church Obama attends that has now conveniently taken down its racist website. I saw it before they did. I even copied it. It offended me too.

The thing that offends me the most? While Obama was carefully grooming himself all these years to run for President, the Clintons were actually doing something to help African Americans.

So... What happens if all the black voters do vote for Obama in SC? What kind of race does this become? Demographically, who loses after that? Be careful what you wish for....

Posted by: Brigitte | January 13, 2008 9:55 PM

Brigette-
BS? Senator Obama being 'groomed' for President? Are you kidding?

Senator Obama is bringing a new style of politicking. No more of this petty decisiviness, personal attacks, win at all costs mentality.

That's why we, as a country, have failed to live up to our potential.

That's why we are a cynical nation now, suspicious of all politicians and indifferent to get involved.

But, we Americans are bound by a common set of wants - we want good health, good education, living wages, whether we are black, white, asian or mexican. We don't want the government to give us these things, we want a government that will not let price gouging stand and equal opportunity take a back seat!

It's sad to me when I see the Clintons (both of them) behave like this.

I want this new type of politics, and Obama can deliver.

Posted by: P | January 13, 2008 11:12 PM

The same ol' Clintons still show up once the stress brings down their masks.

Twist and attack if the outright lies don't work. For examples of lies that aren't working;

She has "35 years experience". Really? Doing WHAT?!? Being a lawyer? OK, I'll grant that she IS older than Obama but a more experienced legislator? No. That doesn't fit the facts.

She claims to be "more electable". Really? Sez who? Even before the closer scrutiny begins (i.e., before anyone has had a chance to be reminded of all the joy of her White House years - "teachable moments" like learning be very careful with your kids about what the definition of "is" is or whether oral sex is "sex" or not), 50% of American voters flat-out just will NOT vote for her. If that's her definition of "most electable," then I guess we need to be more specific - like maybe about which country it is she's polling. (OR maybe it's just that pesky definition of "is" again.)

I apologize for sounding so snide but I'm really, REALLY tired of having my intelligence insulted by these incessant Clinton revisionisms. (And by the remarks about Martin Luther King AND Senator Obama, as well.)

Shame on them!

And shame on US if we fall for their scams again...

Posted by: Carmen Cameron | January 14, 2008 6:56 AM

i trust hillary clinton's lifetime of work on issues important to the american people.

i trust her platform of government.

i DON't trust the snake oil salesman obama.

and i am still waiting for WAPO's in depth reporting af the scandalous relationship between obama and indicted political fixer tony rezco.

Posted by: mikel1 | January 14, 2008 9:39 AM

"To set the facts straight": a euphemism meaning "to lie". When you start with crooked facts, they need to get set straight, like arrows. Senator Clinton uses the phrase frequently.

Posted by: Rarignac | January 14, 2008 10:42 AM

All you HRC supporters are kidding yourself. Are you aware of how many people will NEVER vote for her just in the Democratic party alone??? Obama is the best of what we are left with. We would have had a solid chance to win the general with Biden or even Dodd, but, true-to-form, we learched at novelty candidates. I hope he can pull it out. But I know she wont.

By the way, HRC and WJC are fully aware that by bringing this up (any racial issue whatsoever), they muddy the waters of tolerance and force voters (minority or otherwise) to think again about whether this country is ready to move beyond race - eventhough the evidence up to now has been quite positive. ....and Robert Johnson, aside from a small portion of his news programming, I find BET shows playing to the lowest common denominator in the African American community - still I was quite struck how willing he was to be HRC pawn. Both Obama and HRC are risky choices, but Barack is our best chance.

Posted by: ash | January 14, 2008 10:43 AM

I am a middle aged woman - new to blogs and posting but feel that I guess it is time for me to respond to this ridiculous premise that the Clintons are racist and that the media continues to promote this idea. Ridiculous!!!! All Mr Obama has to say is he believes the Clintons are NOT RACIST. that would end this whole thing and we could get back to the real issues in the campaign. WAKE UP PEOPLE - the media is dowing this to you - this is how propaganda is used to move the public!

Posted by: Gail | January 14, 2008 11:21 AM

After reading these comments, I wonder how many actually watched "Meet the Press" yesterday. I watched it twice.

Senator Clinton's performance was below par. She kept trying to filabuster and talked over Tim to avoid answering questions. She even managed to cackle.

Ms Clinton keeps citing issues about Obama with no proof and I am sorry Tim didn't ask followup questions about what they know about how some 5 year old speech had been taken off a web site years ago. They must really have good oppo people to figure out an old post was missing from a web site!

The speech they keep referring to is on the website now, so I still don't understand their issue.

Barak Obama is too smart to keep running if there is really something in his closet beyond a stupid realty purchase from Tony Rezko of 10 feet to add to his yard. My biggest concern about Senator Obama is that he is too close to the Chicago Dem party, but I'm sure the Clinton campaign envies him that.

Michelle Obama wouldn't be going around the country leaving her kids and job if she didn't believe in what he is trying to do. And I can't believe she would be out there if all the cocaine smear had any relevance.

I am a white 57 year old female but I am tired of the slime from the Clinton campaign--and my 79 year old mother attended her first Iowa caucus to vote for Obama after watching all of what happened in Iowa.

Posted by: smhrabak | January 14, 2008 11:29 AM

The spin the Obama campaign is doing playing the race card will haunt them in the end. And this includes the elite press who is also spinning this out of control. Do they really think that Americans are stupid to buy this? Americans will not stoop down to the level the Obama campaign and the press wants this to election to become. Shame on you Obama and your supporters. You go Hillary!

Posted by: I also vote Present! | January 14, 2008 11:52 AM

Ma'am,

The media doesn't have to tell us the Clintons are racist. Their policies do the talking. From the famous "Sister Soulah" moment through the 3 strikes you're out we've witnessed their lack of real concern for the Black community. They use us for votes, and I hope we're not stupid enough to give it to them for free, when we have a candidate who can really do something new and nonpartisan.

Posted by: Tara | January 14, 2008 5:05 PM

A Swing in African American Vote

African-American voters are moving to Obama. Clinton led among blacks by 23 percentage points in late 2007, 56%-33%, but Obama now leads by 25 points, 57%-32%. Former South Carolina Democratic chairman Dick Harpootlian, who supports the Illinois senator, credits Obama's victory in Iowa with persuading black voters elsewhere he is a viable candidate.

Now that Barack Obama is deemed electable, are African Americans voting along Race?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1534

.

Posted by: PollM | January 14, 2008 5:13 PM

The article's headline is misleading, because nowhere in the text does it mention Clinton's accusation of "playing racial politics" toward Obama.The press is fanning the flames of this Democratic rivalry simply because they need something interesting to write about.Although Senator Clinton's comment was inappropriate it was blown entirely out of proportion, and I believe that she was completely unaware of its offensiveness.

Posted by: zack87 | January 15, 2008 10:57 AM

Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine, with Wright's daughters now serving as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.

Maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For most Americans, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler -- "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road." His history is a rancid stew of lies.

describing the September 11 attacks as a "wake-up call" to America for ignoring the concerns of "people of colour", and for claiming that Americans "believe in white supremacy and black inferiority . . . more than we believe in God".
., Obama offers white voters a chance to free themselves from white guilt!

unbelievable and he is running on uniting all people

Posted by: Anonymous | January 18, 2008 6:59 PM

POOR CRYBABY OBAMA, STOP TAKING ABOUT ME! BOO HOO....Its time all you obama supporters stop blaming all his problems on the Clintons, its really SAD and desperate...Its fine for axelrod and obama camp continuing to making up stories about the Clintons and mis-quoting them to keep the race card alive in the election as in attempt to keep attention off his poor senate record and his religious beliefs and that he fails miserably in every debate, where he has no pre written speech. The media bashes Romney for his beliefs why is obama any different, because he's 1/2 black...Poor excuse! Is why the VOTERS not the Clintons are researching and bringing out facts. This is solely because Obama supporters are a little nervous that he cant win in a state that isn't mostly black voters, that his in-experience, poor judgment in the senate and backing bush several times to support the war are all coming to the surface. Did anyone really think he would continue his free ride in the press? Its not the Clintons, its the VOTERS who care about the country and not voting based on his skin color doing the job the media fails to do and research obama. Quite allot of bad, but true information coming out that the VOTERS are entitled to know. He and David axelrod are in a panic... He may be claiming to be a Christian at a black racist church now, I think we all have concerns that he was raised a Muslim. His father was step father were Muslims, were does his loyalty fall. I think it's sad that he is ashamed of his parents and heritage. Where's his pride? He also is half white correct? Or is he denying that too! He is a grown man, "STOP CRYING OBAMA, its proof he isn't ready to lead. If he hadn't turned this election in blacks against whites and his wife's continued racist stumping (as she was booed out of NV) he would not be having these issues. I'm glad it's all coming out!
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK VOTERS

Posted by: Anonymous | January 23, 2008 10:35 AM

OBAMA'S DREAM IS UNIVERSAL

Today, once again, I read this horrible classification of candidates. Mrs. Clinton represents gender; Mr. Obama represents race; and Mr. Edwards represents class.
How untrue! They have many things in common. Their offers for change are almost the same, but their difference is that Mr. Obama inspires.
Without trying to educate anyone, I would like to share with you the definition that my Oxford pocket book dictionary gives of the verb "to inspire", which among other definitions, says: animate or instill (a person) with a feeling; prompt, give rise to. It also lists the following synonyms: move, arouse, awaken, uplift, encourage, energize, invigorate, etc. The only candidate that can communicate all of the synonyms is Mr. Obama, and he does it with truth and clarity.
Perhaps Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards the can move their followers with the same feelings listed in the synonyms, and I sincerely congratulate them. However, I would suggest that they look into their souls and hearts and ask if their candidate really moves, arouses, awakens, uplifts, encourages, energizes and invigorates them as Mr. Obama does for me.
Obama's dream is universal, it has no gender, class or race. It embraces everyone who has a dream and wants to follow that dream. It's never too late to embrace this great cause. Join in this universal dream, and be a part of this true and only dream and hope for a better country for Americans and better world for our brethren.

Posted by: esther_624 | January 26, 2008 5:33 PM

Hillary held to a higher level of courtesy than Obama in racial politics was the outcome of the South Carolina exit polls on race.

Given the fact that in the world of discrimination, social promotion has always been a dilemma, it seems reasonable to expect that both Hillary and Obama deserve equal scrutiny for the equal opportunity that America is making available.

The emotional impulse to "make history" with either of them cannot overshadow the fact and the reality that America is still about to elect a President, and it is a very serious business where the most minute scrutiny is not only tolerated but encouraged, and that no candidate should be presumed to be free from it by the same criteria and standards - an apples to apples comparison of intellectual rigor, vitality, judgement and integrity - however those are measured. Obviously experience is a large part of that scrutiny, and Americans should not be poised to sacrifice their interests or feel guilt about making such inquiries and satisfying themselves of the faith and trust upon which their vote is cast.

Elections are not about the comfort of the candidates but the comfort of the public. Hence, polls over attacks may be interesting but are irrelevant for a purpose other than to seek the truth and character of the candidates by examination and revelation.

Posted by: Pat | January 27, 2008 11:20 AM

is there anyone who can tell me if president Jonhson had not signed the civil rights act it it would,ve become a law when it did? MLK he was a great he used his intellinge and his desire to bring about change Obama? he looks like a crying baby to me " u pick on me cause i am black" you lnow what i dealt with something similar for 23 years i arrested many theis excuse was u doing it cause i am black my answer was no i'm arresting you because u are a thief trying to wa;lk out without paying theil food bill

Posted by: greek | January 28, 2008 8:24 PM

I'm undecided about who & which party I'm voting for, but found this great article called "Black Voters and a Twist of Bias" on the BlogZine SAVAGE POLITICS.

http://savagepolitics.com/?p=59
WOW- all I have to say!
Here is an excerpt: "Last Saturday's South Carolina Democratic Primary produced the widely expected result of a Barack Obama victory. From the beginning of the week, it was the ethnic composition of the State in question which was amply discussed by both the Media and it's multiple pundits. It was here and through other sources that we discovered that 55% percent of Democratic voters in South Carolina were African American. An interesting number when you consider the "coincidence" that Obama actually won the election by exactly the same margin: 55%. Of course, many in Clinton's campaign have used this demographic reality to spin their defeat, vociferating that they had always expected to loose from the start. It should be noted that it has been this exact attitude which they have ridiculed Obama's camp for, insinuating that they had proved to be "sore losers" by not admitting their own failures in stating their case to the American People. As we all know, in modern politics, no campaign is free of idiotic childishness, sadly resurfacing the reality that our current political existence is dominated by whining imbeciles of the lowest ilk. Nevertheless, the Clinton Campaign's affirmation (victory based on a unified ethnic constituency) is valid, especially when we consider the data.
The Primary's exit polling, presented by all major networks, were utilized by analysts to determine how was Obama's, Edwards', and Clinton's support spread throughout different social markers. Their results indicated that 80% of the Black vote, and only 20% of the White vote, went towards Barack Obama. Regarding most White voters in the State, you could easily identify their split between John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. The significance of this racial division is crucial in understanding the fate of Barack Obama's campaign, and the Democratic Party, if they chose to face the General Election with him at the helm...." Find the rest of the article at http://savagepolitics.com/?p=59

Posted by: elsylee28 | January 29, 2008 11:56 AM

HUSSEIN OBAMA will have the desk removed from the oval office just to have room to spread-out his muslim prayer rug. He will outlaw displays of the American flag like he has at his rallies of 'white-cracker' hating supporters. His use of the race card may work on TV, but it won't work at the polls. The majority of voters are simply not going to accept a black muslim president. Nice try HUSSEIN, but the good ole USA just ain't ready for your no-substance rhetoric.

Posted by: Anonymous | January 30, 2008 6:23 PM

Why is it when any one criticizes Obama on any of his fabrications, he brings up race. Is this his most intelligent reply ?

Posted by: gatorsn2008 | January 13, 2008 04:44 PM

Uh Hum, das right bro, nome sayin

Posted by: Anonymous | January 30, 2008 6:26 PM

It clear that the Post and other beltway influences are really troubled by Obama connecting with such a diverse base of support. It just wasn't supposedly to happen that way - - Obama was supposed to be a flash in the pan. HRC was supposed to prevail.

And, if the so-called "race card" is being played by anyone, it's the beltway king-makers, other insiders and the Clintons themselves. Not by Obama.

Obama has convinced me, a 65-year white male, ex-Marine, and long-time Republican (except '72 and '04) that he is a unifier and consensus builder. If anyone can formulate and articulate a vision for America it's Obama...the rest of the candidates from both parties are merely pandering.

Obama also makes people feel as if they are stakeholders...I'm sure it will be a shared vision that Obama advocates. It has been so far.

The nearly silent cry I hear everyday is that of Americans passively pleading for a return to the unity of our nation state. Return the "United" back into the United States.

That's different theme from Clinton's perception that America is a global corporate state. Behind their thinly vieled curtain of babble, the Clinton's want us to compete with third world countries who pay wages of a $1/day, and whose people go potty in the local stream. At least that's a perspective of the great global economy brought America WJC. It's his legacy, and it's his wife's agenda.

But just to speak to Obama's strengths, he has convinced me he has the high energy of youth and that he has guts.

He will meet face-to-face with our so-called enemies, and I am sure he will have success in mitigating the tensions caused by Bush and the gang of empty suits surrounding him.

Obama is the right person for the time.

Posted by: Vunderlutz | February 3, 2008 4:33 PM

why people should consider black men or black women he/she was play racial political ageda? the answer it is not true it has been 400 years black African struggle for justice after 40 years in slaver and black man mostly qualify like senate barack deserve to change direction history it is unbelieveable form white racial porfile.the most american people black and white voters they believe for senate obama deserve better he can be next president of united states of American. we should not played that card of racial high profile.the black and white are defense this country for greates of united state of american.
thank you

Posted by: J.m.Thogkow | February 8, 2008 12:06 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company