Obama Campaign Continues “Clintons are Racists” Meme

January 14th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Barack Obama should be ashamed of himself, that’s one, and two is: he can try this with his Republican opponent if he wins the Democratic nomination, but something tells me Republicans aren’t really down with dirty tricks like this.

What this entire episode has proven, though, is that Obama isn’t more innocent, or doesn’t fight less dirty than any of the other candidates. He’s also not the uniter he says he is. He is a divider. He’s purposefully playing the race card and race baiting whenever he can.

These are tactics that I personally don’t just find deplorable: it truly makes my blood boil. The Clintons have done a lot of work for African-Americans and now Obama and his minions are trying to convince blacks that the Clintons are, in reality, racists.

Taylor Marsh explains:

Using the race card against Hillary Clinton is laughable.

What it reveals is the signs of abject desperation by Mr. Obama and his campaign, which is obviously hoping to inflame African Americans in South Carolina in order to push him across the finish line to victory. Because after the New Hampshire loss, Obama is now under real pressure and simply has to win in South Carolina. The loss in New Hampshire knocked them back into a defensive crouch and they’re going overtly negative on the one issue that is sure to inflame everyone: race. Obviously, they think it’s an ace for them so they’re going to hit that emotional card and hit it hard.

Now, after Jackson and Dyson, here comes the campaign’s final pitch. It’s an email being forwarded around that I got from a reader who has access, so I’m obviously not the only one receiving it. I haven’t seen it posted so far, but it’s important so I’m offering it in part. One caveat, I cannot confirm that this came straight from the Obama camp, so I’m presenting it as received. There was no “to” and “from” at the top, but the body of the email printed below is exactly as I received it. Notice the signature line at the bottom. The email sent to me offers the original email under the name of Obama’s South Carolina Press Secretary. Someone who forwarded it originally either forgot or intentionally left on Obama’s South Carolina Press Secretary’s name and information. I have taken her cell phone number and direct Obama campaign number off…

This is exactly how campaigns push their narrative to the press. I don’t get Obama’s material and they don’t return my emails, but I know how this is done.

The Obama campaign started playing the race card immediately after Obama lost New Hampshire with Jackson Jr., then upped the dialogue with Dyson, going further with the above press release. Playing the race card before South Carolina? It fits right in with the ugly politics that is regularly seen in that state every time the presidential primaries roll around.

I have to say that I find this to be very disappointing. American politics are extremely dirty, we all know that, but one wonders why American voters accept all the BS. They don’t just accept it, they even happily play along.

A message to Obama: you should win because you’re the best, not because you’re black. Stop playing the race card. The ‘white man’ isn’t ‘keeping you down’ nor the ‘white woman.’ If you win it’s because you’re the best candidate, if you lose it’s because you’re, wait for it, not the best.

I was just thinking: Obama’s in office. Decided to do something with regardst o foreign policy. Europe says “well, we can’t support you.” Obama’s reaction?

RACISTS!

That won’t play very well on an international stage.

Lastly also read this post at MyDD:

Obama is on a roll, another Obama smear memo has been intercepted by Clinton campaign. This time, Obama smeared President Clinton of giving a for-profit speech on 911. What makes this incident even worse is that this faked story appears being copied directly from Druge. TPM has the scoop.

So much for a “new kind of politics”.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. June Lee
    January 14th, 2008 at 12:02
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Senator Obama has never said the Clintons are racist. Senator Obama has never even responded or commented on HRC or her surrogates recent comments about him until today and even in the response he didn’t mention racism not once.  Can you cite any source that Senator Obama has ever called the Clinton’s racist or that anyone from the campaign has ever called the Clintons racist?   Please remove your blinders and stop going into the dirty politics.  Might I suggest you go back to when these comments began and complete your own timeline of the events you are talking about with both HRC & her surrogates.

  2. KISSman
    January 14th, 2008 at 12:13
    Reply | Quote | #2

    I cannot fathom how you could possibly understand the dynamic of this presidential race from afar.  You can’t.
    First off, it was the Clintons who started with the race issue and now it’s up to the Clintons to clean up their mess.  Instead of taking blame for their recent blunders, they have just pointed the finger at the Obama campaign — as if they brought these things up.
    If the Clintons didn’t open up their mouths and say such nonsensical things, they wouldn’t be in this predicament.  Hillary and Bill have gone negative ever since she slipped behind Obama in the Iowa polls and remained negative.  Obama is easily the most positive candidate running on either side of the isle and any reasonable person keeping a close eye on the presidential race would agree.
    Furthermore, the headline to this post is completely false.  It’s funny how bias can distort the facts.  NO ONE believes that the Clintons are racists.  NO ONE.  Get that?  Let me repeat: NO ONE.

  3. Michael van der Galien
    January 14th, 2008 at 12:32
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Obama is easily the most positive candidate running on either side of the isle and any reasonable person keeping a close eye on the presidential race would agree.
    I’m keeping a close eye on the race and I strongly disagree. In fact, Obama’s quite as negative as the others. The difference is that he’s more hypocritical about it. "Hope!" "Change!"

    "Yo, the Clinton’s are racists man!"

    That’s not positive.

  4. abrisaham
    January 14th, 2008 at 15:30
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Perhaps Mr. van der Galien this is why Hillary Clinton is leading nationally.  The people really see thru this ploy.

    It seems the far left has unleashed its hate machine against Hillary now.  For years its been unleashed on Bush and the GOP.  Today they have simply switched gears and are now going after Hillary.  Its pretty sad for the Democrats when a person who is far left is not far left enough for these lunatics.

    How sad for our party.

  5. ChrisWWW
    January 14th, 2008 at 16:33
    Reply | Quote | #5

    but something tells me Republicans aren’t really down with dirty tricks like this.

    Yeah, they’ll use far dirtier and more effective tricks :-)

    But anyways, I agree with June Lee.  Having the support of Dyson and Jackson doesn’t mean you’re calling Clinton a racist.  Having an internal memo discussing how to respond to Clinton’s attacks doesn’t mean you’re calling Clinton a racist.

  6. Tired of the drama
    January 14th, 2008 at 16:34
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Note to Hillary Heads – we ain’t buying it!

    The Clinton campaign has had one too many "accidental" rascist (drugs, muslims, etc.) comments, and they are not gonna be able to shuck and jive their way out of it, no matter how many of their "black friends" try to convince us that we can’t trust our own eyes and ears.

    We can think for ourselves, we don’t need you good folks to "explain" it too us.

  7. Michael van der Galien
    January 14th, 2008 at 16:45
    Reply | Quote | #7

    We can think for ourselves, we don’t need you good folks to "explain" it too us.

    Seemingly you actually can’t think for yourself. But whatever makes you happy.

  8. Rudi666
    January 14th, 2008 at 17:34
    Reply | Quote | #8

    This is all a little too much drama. What this is really about is the Clinton’s using proxies, deliberately or just ignoring, to keep Obama’s honest admission about his youthfull drug use in the public eye. It started with Bill Shaheen and continues with Robert Johnson. These two Clinton supporters(Shaheen and Johnson) aren’t on the fringe, they’re part of the Clinton inner circle. The use of proxies to perpetuate myths and attacks is a staple of dirty politics.

  9. Tedegsa
    January 14th, 2008 at 20:02
    Reply | Quote | #9

    Hillary Clinton is desperately trying to inject race into the conversation. The best way to deal with it is not to take the bait.

    This is the dirty trick of the Clintons.  They are VULTURES.

  10. KISSman
    January 15th, 2008 at 01:04

    Michael van der Galien: "Yo, the Clinton’s are racists man!"  That’s not positive.

    Who said this???  Maybe where you live which is a county that has about the demographics of Iowa that this kinda portrail of the Obama and his campaign is acceptable.   But to me, this characterization of Obama comes off as… well, I’ll use the word unprofessional, but that isn’t even close to what I really think it is.

    While you are at it, why don’t you start printing facts.  Try this one:

    "I don’t think it was in any way a racial comment," Obama told ABC News (concerning Clinton’s MLK comment).

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.