Bill Clinton On Sharp Attack Against Obama Again (UPDATED)
The upcoming primaries in Ohio and Texas are widely-considered as critical for Senator Hillary Clinton to regain momentum against Senator Barack Obama. So, just as he surfaced after his wife lost Iowa and began a series of controversial personal attacks on Obama, Bill Clinton is back in the negative campaigning saddle again.
And, as this news report shows, his statements don’t hold up to scrutiny. ABC News’ Political Punch:
ABC News’ Sarah Amos reports that former President Bill Clinton — despite myriad promises he would stop assailing his wife’s opponent given how it has backfired on her — upped his harsh attacks today in Tyler, Texas.
“There are two competing moods in America today,” Clinton said. “People who want something fresh and new — and they find it inspiring that we might elect a president who literally was not part of any of the good things that happened or any of the bad things that were stopped before. The explicit argument of the campaign against Hillary is that ‘No one who was involved in the 1990s or this decade can possibly be an effective president because they had fights. We’re not going to have any of those anymore.’ Well, if you believe that, I got some land I wanna sell you.”
The only problem is: it’s an inaccurate statement:
ABC News’ Sarah Amos is traveling with the former president and transcribed his comments.
For the record, in the 1990s, Obama was a civil rights attorney, community organizer, and was in the Illinois state senate.Presumably, by “any of the good things that happened” in the 1990s, Clinton is referring to the things he did as president (except for the ones his wife now distances herself from, such as NAFTA).
Sometimes, it sure feels like the former president’s defense of his legacy gets in the way of his campaigning for his wife.
And PP had an update that’s instructive:
UPDATE: Obama campaign spox Bill Burton tells ABC News in response, “It appears that the man who once told us ‘Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow’ has changed his tune and is now singing ‘Yesterday’ everywhere he goes.”
Since The Bill Clinton issue arose before, you have to conclude that given the high stakes in these upcoming primaries, if he is making statements like this and continues to make them in coming weeks, it will mean they’re condoned by Mrs. Clinton’s top campaign command, or by Mrs. Clinton — and probably part of a repeat strategy.
It would signal that the Clintons are unofficially going back to what occurred in New Hampshire: after Hillary Clinton lost in Iowa, the two moved on to New Hampshire. Bill Clinton went negative there, got soundly condemned in many quarters, but Hillary Clinton won the primary.
You wonder what ever happened to Bill Clinton’s political instincts. By making statements that tell only part of the story — and one clearly inaccurate (unless you consider civil rights work irrelevant) — he is losing some credibility and certainly giving pause to voters who may have no problem with Mrs. Clinton in the Oval Office but don’t like what they’re hearing from Mr. Clinton and don’t want him in it as an unofficial co-President.
But there is a silver lining: at least this time Mr. Clinton didn’t play the race card.
UPDATE: Feb. 16, 2008 a.m. A new Dallas Morning News story reports that Bill Clinton is now avoiding attacks on Obama:
On a campaign swing through East Texas on Friday, Bill Clinton said over and over that he has nothing against Barack Obama.
“I’m not against anybody,” he told an overflow crowd in the student center at Tyler Junior College. “I’m for Hillary.” Later, he added: “If you disagree, you have another very attractive choice.”
The former president, admitting that Texas looms as a make-or-break state for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential hopes, scrupulously avoided attacks on Mr. Obama – attacks of the type for which he was roundly criticized after the Jan. 26 South Carolina primary.
Mr. Obama’s campaign unveiled new TV and radio ads in Texas while the Illinois senator campaigned in Wisconsin and secured a key labor endorsement, from the Service Employees International Union.
Mr. Clinton acknowledged that Mr. Obama is widely perceived as the “new and different” Democratic candidate – or, as he said in Texarkana, the candidate who “excites more Americans.” He noted that he campaigned for Mr. Obama when he ran for the U.S. Senate from Illinois in 2004.
But, Mr. Clinton said, his wife’s superior ideas and her years of experience in and around public service simply make her the better choice.
“If you’re looking for a change agent … she’s your candidate,” he said. As a New York senator, he said, she has shown an ability to work with Republicans and to win in rural counties where the GOP usually dominates.
Meanwhile, there has been lots of blog discussion on the re-emergence of Bill Clinton as a campaign story. Read the reaction HERE.
11 Responses to “Bill Clinton On Sharp Attack Against Obama Again (UPDATED)”
When did President Clinton play the race card?
Is that a joke? Go to google and see the reaction to his comments after Obama won South Carolina. In addition, cartoonists had a field day with that comment. There were charges before that that he was raising it in subtle was and denied it. We ran several cagle cartoons with that as the theme. Sorry, I'm not going to rehash what was out there in the media for a LONG time. Go and read some of the columns by top columnists. Go to categories on tmv and read all of our posts on bill clintons campaigning. His comments after south carolina that oh, jessie jackson won there before (pointing to jackon's win there in the 80s and not to the NONBLACK candidates who won there in the past) was widely condemned as raising the race card. I'm NOT going get into a debate in comments over something that was widely covered in the news. It's like debating whether the moon is the moon. Read our posts under the Bill Clinton category, check out the links and google his comments after obama won south carolina and see what columnists and editorial writesr and bloggers wrote.
Given that we'll be seeing more of these types of comments, not just by Bill, but by the various campaigns and their spouses (and those pesky “surrogates”)- though I hope not too many by Obama
I think I'll start keeping a scorecard.
Thanks, Joe for giving me my first entry.
Obviously you and I have different definitions of race baiting, let me introduce you to real race baiting YouTube – Harold call me. Now can you see the difference?
You mean Bill Clinton made an inaccurate statement? Hmmm….And certainly, no one would debate you on the moon, Joe. Everyone knows it's made of cheese. But don't take my word for it, just ask Ted Kennedy. I hear he's honest.
You might want to go to the link below and contact all of these sites and let them know Bill Clinton never played the race card. You could do some more research and you can then contact all of the editors of major newspapers and magazines, plus the wire services, and let them know their definition is wrong. But, alas, this is all game playing so this is my last comment on this. A can of ravioli on the shelf at Stop and Shop in New Haven Connecticut is aware of the controversy over Mr.Clinton.
But since you were nice enough to offer me a link to go to (I reall don't have time for it…i'm on a trip right now and have to choose between doing posts and comments and I choose the posts) here is a link that will give you lots to do in contacting all of these websites and also the source material so you can contact the editors whose news outlet material the linked to. The issue isn't Ted Kennedy, or anyone else. It's Bill Clinton's comments that have turned off many people such as independent voters like myself who defended him during impeachment and voted for him:
http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&r…
The Harold Call me commercial was soundly condemned on this site. It was race baiting as were Mr. Clinton's comments that got him into so much trouble with the press and led to him keeping a lower profile…for a while. The difference was the Harold commercial came from Republicans; Mr. Clinton is a democrat. It's irrelevant what party someone belongs to. The comments he made in the post above are NOT playing the race card. And with that, I leave you to continue to deny and issue that was a huge issue in the press was an issue at all.
ALSO: Be SURE to let columnists such as The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson know that Bill Clinton never played the race card. Here's his column. You can start with him (there many other columnists, conservative and liberal, who dealt with this issue).
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articl…
After putting up that link, it said the article isn't there. So here's the beginning of this article. This is silly since you know he played it and this is typical of the kind of thing in comments that occurs…and why I don't read them, unlike most other bloggers. There is a lot of game playing. But in case any readers truly think this was no issue: Eugene Robinson:
(column begins)
Playing the race card against Barack Obama didn't work quite the way Bill Clinton had hoped. Neither did a reported last-minute personal appeal to keep Ted Kennedy from joining the Obama crusade. The question is whether the Clintons understand how the country has changed.
On Saturday, a reporter asked Bill about Obama's boast that it took two Clintons to try to beat him. Bill replied: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.”
The only possible reason for invoking Jackson's name was to telegraph the following message: Barack Obama is black, so if a lot of black people decide to vote for him — doubtless out of racial solidarity — it doesn't mean squat.
And the reasons to send that message would be to devalue an Obama victory in South Carolina; to inoculate the Clinton campaign against potential losses in Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee — Southern states with large African-American populations — next Tuesday; and, most important, to pigeonhole Obama as “a black candidate” as opposed to “a candidate who, among other characteristics, is black.”
(end of excerpt)
There a many many more blog posts, columnists, major editorials, cartoons (which we ran on tmv). Click on our Bill Clinton category and read our posts.
It is widely reported…including by Robert Novak…that Bill Clinton's actions are what caused Teddy Kennedy to endorse Obama. And why some independent voters are balkiing at Hillary Clinton — who as a candidate on her own, has grown enormously, been by all accounts an excellent New York Senator and didn't need the kind of polarizing “help” that her husband has gifted her.
And with that…hasta luego
Joe I really appreciate your response on this topic. I liked the way you gave the facts about the statements and your response. It's good to be back in the old TMV that I came to enjoy. I will be back more often now.
You might want to go to the link below and contact all of these sites and let them know Bill Clinton never played the race card. You could do some more research and you can then contact all of the editors of major newspapers and magazines, plus the wire services, and let them know their definition is wrong.
Considering how often all those people are wrong, I'll stick to someone who's been right when all those people were wrong, Professor Krugman and here is his take on said race card On race cards and all that.
If Obama wins, and I hope he doesn't, you are going to have a chance to see what the race card looks like. I hope that you and the rest of the Press will be as sensitive to the race card as you are right now, but I am not expecting it, IOKIYAR.
Clenis is now “pimping his charitable foundation on Billary's behalf. What does uranium mining, Frank “newcomer to uranium mining” Giustra and Kazakhstan have in common? In many voters minds it's now – Anybody But Clinton/Bush (ABCB).
Joe
If I may quickly add a point about Bill Clinton's South Carolina Narrative: he could have said, winning SC does not guarantee the nomination and looked to John Edwards' victory in 2004 in that primary. Edwards, like Obama, was a Senator. 2004 was 4 years ago.
Instead, he compared Obama to Jesse Jackson, a man who had NEVER been elected to office and went back 20 and 24 years!!!! to get his comparison.
I loved Bill Clinton and voted for he and Hillary twice each. But I excused them both way too often. Her debating strategy and his angry and obviously sly attacks on Obama have made me feel like an almost 60 year old fool.
Morale for me? Just because someone has bad and real enemies, that does not mean that person is good.
I pray to the God I believe in (I am a more than once a week liberal church-goer) that I stop making excuses for my friends. I loved your site since I discovered it because you keep your eyes on where anyone is correct and where anyone is lying whether they are a hero to you or not.