home

Obama Campaign Provides Photo of Rev. Wright Shaking Hands With Bill Clinton

I'm not sure whatpoint the Obama campaign thought they were making by providing the New York Times with a picture of Rev. Jeremiah Wright in a room full of people at a 1998 Prayer Breakfast at the White House shaking hands with Bill Clinton.

In providing the photograph to The New York Times, the Obama campaign appeared to be trying to divert some attention to the Clintons after a week in which Mr. Obama’s relationship with Mr. Wright has left him facing one of the biggest challenges of his campaign. There is nothing in the picture or the note that addresses whether Mr. Clinton had met Mr. Wright prior to the White House meeting or whether he or Mrs. Clinton knew anything about Mr. Wright’s views.

The Clinton campaign had this response (received by e-mail, no link)

"Less than 48 hours after calling for a high-minded conversation on race, according to the New York Times the Obama campaign is peddling photos of an occasion when President Clinton shook hands with Reverend Wright. To be clear, President Clinton took tens of thousands of photos during his eight years as president."

Update: Comments now closed.

< Hello, West Virginia: Hillary 55%, Obama 27% | Bill Richardson to Endorse Obama >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Jeremiah Wright back in the news (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by diplomatic on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:32:15 PM EST
    Ok then.

    And why is Obama calling attention to him (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by katiebird on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:34:22 PM EST
    Does Obama think that Wright in any company is good news?

    [ Parent ]
    You folks seriously underestimate the power of the (none / 0) (#152)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:07:34 AM EST
    black church vote don't you all?

    Basically Democrats have alienated the most loyal group of Democratic voters without who no Democratic can get elected President.

    [ Parent ]

    how have Dems alienated the AA community? (5.00 / 0) (#162)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:14:20 AM EST
    The Race Card was first initiated by Michelle Obama and Oprah telling AAs to vote for THE ONE - the black one.
    Obama approved those political announcements.

    [ Parent ]
    You think black people agree (none / 0) (#181)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:27:28 AM EST
    with that assessment of what happened?  Bill Clinton has lost 15-20% of black support (how many folks like him) since this campaign started. It's pretty clear Black folks don't agree with you.

    Again. The Black church vote is the most loyal Democratic vote. Dems allowed one of their preachers to be attacked and didn't defend him for at least the imperialism and oppression messages. McCain and Huckabee did though. That will not have gone unnoticed.

    [ Parent ]

    I believe women (5.00 / 0) (#189)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:30:26 AM EST
    are the most loyal Democratic vote.
    Could be wrong, though.  ;)

    [ Parent ]
    That would be incorrect statistically. (none / 0) (#195)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:31:50 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    didn't the latest poll say she had 57% (5.00 / 0) (#231)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:54:48 AM EST
    if she went H2H with McCain? I thought I saw that today?

    And how exactly were the "Dems" supposed to defend him? Did Obama do enough? Or is this all on Sen Clinton?

    [ Parent ]

    Bill is not running for president. (none / 0) (#206)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:35:51 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Um, no. (5.00 / 0) (#202)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:34:08 AM EST
    That would be women. Larger part of the electorate, larger part of the voters. Like, 60%.


    [ Parent ]
    Uh no. 90% of African-Americans vote (none / 0) (#204)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:35:15 AM EST
    Democrat. That's bigger than 60.

    [ Parent ]
    Um uh no. (none / 0) (#209)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:38:22 AM EST
    Not 60% of women. Women are 60% of the total Democratic vote.

    [ Parent ]
    Someone got tripped up by (5.00 / 0) (#213)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:39:44 AM EST
    "the math"

    [ Parent ]
    And here I always thought (5.00 / 0) (#242)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:30:37 AM EST
    it was women who were supposed to be math-challenged.

    Barbie: "Math is hard."

    [ Parent ]

    Bill Clinton and Wright (5.00 / 1) (#235)
    by PennProgressive on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:03:35 AM EST
    If Obama camp wants to assert that Wright may not be all that bad (I  am not suggesting  he is) because Bill Clinton shook his hand, fine. They seem to be thinking highly of Bill Clinton (lol). If they want to suggest that Bill Clinton also had a relationship with him not just Obama and  So Obama's judjement cannot be  called into question in this regard,that argument is laughable. I don't understand why they would bring up Wright, unless contrary to the spirit of the speech they want to use the  picture to tell White America that even Clintons were cozy with the "scary" preacher.  If that is the case it is really sad and disgusting. And it  is not going to work.

    [ Parent ]
    whatever (none / 0) (#154)
    by english teacher on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:08:44 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Whatever? Take a look at the stats. (none / 0) (#160)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:12:59 AM EST
    Something like 20% of Bill Clinton's votes were from African-Americans. Not one Democrat can be elected President without that group. Black churches do not like their preachers attacked. You think it went unnoticed that only McCain and Huckabee defended Wright and Obama?

    [ Parent ]
    The Clintons are not attacking Wright (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:24:26 AM EST
    But exactly how do want Bill Clinton to defend Rev Wright?   Should he thank the Rev for saying that he (WJC) was "riding dirty" and that he committed an Monica on the AA community ?

    [ Parent ]
    yeah, whatever (none / 0) (#163)
    by RalphB on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:15:21 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    The hypocrisy is never ending (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by txchicanoforhillary on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:54:37 PM EST
    and thanks Sen Obama for keeping Rev Wright in the news and giving it to the NY Times.

    Someone's campaign is in trouble.  What was it that they were saying about the kitchen sink?

    [ Parent ]

    It seems they are fishing scraps (5.00 / 2) (#138)
    by Practically Lactating on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:54:57 PM EST
    out of the garbage disposal before throwing the sink.

    Unfortunately for the Obama campaign, it is much easier to take the high road when you have the media doing your dirty work for you. My suspicion has been that Obama does not have a plan B (or even a variation of plan A) for his campaign strategy, that he does not know how to pivot, and the desperation coming from his campaign seems to support that theory.

    Unless Deval Patrick shared a similar dilemma in his race, I don't think Obama's campaign will be able to lay the groundwork to shift effectively.

    [ Parent ]

    Our only hope to defuse the Wright scandal (none / 0) (#82)
    by Friday on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:13:49 PM EST
    ...is to frankly admit the right-wing noise machine has tainted Obama and he can't be the nominee.

    They'll never drop it, so if we drop Obama, we can neutralize this attack.

    And they won't have anything to use against the D candidate in November.

    [ Parent ]

    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by txchicanoforhillary on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:27:04 PM EST
    the far right loves to paint the Dems as America haters.  Wright just drives that point home.  That photo of Bill Clinton doesn't pass the smell test.  Barack kanoodled with this man for 20 years.  What a desperate and sad attempt by his campaign.  

    Hope and change.  Yeah, right.

    [ Parent ]

    A bit late for that. (none / 0) (#156)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:10:14 AM EST
    Why in the world do you think African-Americans will vote for people who didn't defend Wright?

    [ Parent ]
    Defending Wright.... (5.00 / 0) (#167)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:20:44 AM EST
    Riding Dirty

    Now tell me, why should Hillary defend this?  

    [ Parent ]

    Because she can't win without the black (none / 0) (#169)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:23:08 AM EST
    church vote. If she can't understand (not like) Black anger then she shouldn't get their vote though.  

    [ Parent ]
    obama can't win without the black church vote (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by english teacher on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:24:41 AM EST
    clinton wants it, because she has worked her tail off to represent that constituency.  but she doesn't need it to win the general election.  that's just ridiculous.  

    [ Parent ]
    Well I'll disagree about what she's done for that (none / 0) (#186)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:28:49 AM EST
    community. Certainly little that's measurable.

    But that's not really the point. Democrats won't get that vote now unless it's Obama.

    [ Parent ]

    good glad you've cleared all this up (none / 0) (#199)
    by english teacher on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:33:27 AM EST
    and spoken for so many.  you've made your point.  please quit repeating it for christ's sake.

    [ Parent ]
    You're free to stop responding right? (none / 0) (#203)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:34:30 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    and you are free to quit claiming to be (none / 0) (#217)
    by english teacher on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:42:59 AM EST
    the spokesperson for all african americans.

    [ Parent ]
    Excuuuuuse me.... (5.00 / 0) (#187)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:29:49 AM EST
    Anger about what?  Who forced Wright to be vulgar?  Who forced Wright to get disgusting?  

    Who forced the Obama campaign to put down the Black Congressional Caucus members who support Hillary?  

    [ Parent ]

    Anger about what? (none / 0) (#197)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:32:27 AM EST
    You  must be joking.

    [ Parent ]
    If she has to defend (5.00 / 1) (#232)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:58:28 AM EST
    Wright's attacks on her to get the vote, she's better off without them.

    [ Parent ]
    Not every AA supports what Wright said (none / 0) (#178)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:25:59 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    when did you get appointed spokesperson (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by english teacher on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:23:22 AM EST
    for african americans?  

    [ Parent ]
    As I appear to know far more about the (1.00 / 1) (#188)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:30:01 AM EST
    voting habits of that demographic than anyone here I don't think my qualifications are at issue.

    [ Parent ]
    Explain to me... (5.00 / 2) (#198)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:32:53 AM EST
    as a human being, after watching the Wright video about Bill and Hillary, what moral obligation does Hillary have to defend him?  What?  For votes?  This is a man of the "cloth" who gestures obscenely at the pulpit.  

    [ Parent ]
    As you appear to be clueless (5.00 / 2) (#234)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:02:50 AM EST
    about the voting habits of any other demographic - such as women, who are the majority of Democrats - you'll forgive me if I don't think much of your "qualifications."

    [ Parent ]
    I appear....not at issue? (5.00 / 3) (#239)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:18:30 AM EST
    hmmmm....since I know more about the mating habits of marsupials I would appreciate that you take, at face value, everything I have to say about the fact that marsupials, contrary to popular belief, do not practice safe sex.

    not that my sarcasm questions your credentials pertaining to "having the pulse of African-American voters"....but,  Dems can't win without the AA vote.  That may be true but if Hillary does not get the AA vote if she gets the nomination it has nothing to do with her lack of support for a racially and politically divisive preacher--it will have everything to do with the consistent insistence by Obama supporters that racism is a part of Hillary's fundamental beliefs.  You and those like you, who continually charge Clinton with those beliefs, should be ashamed for resorting to the same type of smear tactic Karl Rove would use..but none of you are ashamed and that is why I have no respect for the Obama campaign nor its supporters.

    Try this on for size: Hillary responds to criticism of Obama's spiritual leader by saying,  "Reverend Wright, is the epicenter of progressive thought.  In fact I've often commented to my spiritual leader that he should "damn America" in his sermons while also reminding his congregation that his white members are more than likely harboring deep seated racist ideals (endemic white racism) and that nothing in this country will change until the US Govt stops purposely infecting blacks with the AIDS virus."  

    I'd give Wright a pass if he agrees to go minister some lilly-white town in North Dakota...gets to know some average white people.  Then goes to the Middle East to see if Israel actually is the main problem or just a part of the problem.  Then I'd like him to go back to school and actually learn about the W's about AIDS.  Then I want him to publicly apologize for his divisive comments, especially to Hillary Clinton.  There is no logical explanation why Hillary, or any other white person, can't be supportive of civil and equal rights for all without having to have been called a "ni**er".

    [ Parent ]

    Are you saying ALL AA think the same way? (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by blogtopus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:23:57 AM EST
    Sounds kind of presumptuous to me.

    I think that there is a wide range of African Americans, just as there is a wide range of Caucasions, Asians, Latinos, etc.

    You do them a disservice to lump them into one homogenous group. You underestimate their power of independent thought.

    Besides, everybody knows ALL the Latinos already outnumber AAs and they love Hillary. [/wiseass]

    [ Parent ]

    The most consistent and loyal voting (2.00 / 1) (#193)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:31:19 AM EST
    block is also the most easily tracked.

    Ditching the Dems is quite independent. Sticking by them regardless of what happens is not.

    No one is talking absolutes. Doesn't need to be absolute.

    [ Parent ]

    A friend of mine was on the plane... (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:25:16 AM EST
    that went into the Pentagon. And my sister was scheduled to be at a meeting in that part of the building that day.

    Given his "home to roost" invective after 9/11, why should I defend his invective style of rhetoric any more than I'd defend Robertson/Falwell for their hate speech blaming liberals, pagans, feminists, and a host of others for 9/11?

    [ Parent ]

    What? Does the farmer deserve to have (1.50 / 2) (#201)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:33:59 AM EST
    his chickens come home or does/should expect them to?

    You misunderstand the phrase. However, it's commonly  referred to as "blowback". People write books about it and stuff. Are they bad people too?

    [ Parent ]

    Oh I understand the phrase... (5.00 / 2) (#224)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:49:57 AM EST
    You're missing something...a big something when it comes to his rhetorical style.

    There is a big difference between going through the event and doing an analysis of what happened and what some of the root causes might be/what are some possible solutions to the issue and standing up on a stage with a fire and brimstone sermon that lays blame.

    It's in his reductionist argument and style, one that Obama sought to distance himself from in his speech while you're defending it, that I have issues with.

    When I hear vitriolic comments like his, Robertson's, Falwell's, and others about that day, the loss of a friend comes back...the sound of another friend's voice break with tears as she compared her walk home from work in Manhattan to a cacaphonic Pompeii.

    It's shocking...but not in a good way.

    [ Parent ]

    Because AAs don't all think alike (5.00 / 1) (#216)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:42:43 AM EST
    and don't all think Wright is defensible.

    And why is this Hillary's problem? Obama doesn't defend her when she's attacked with sexism.

    [ Parent ]

    The irony: (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by ahazydelirium on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:09:51 PM EST
    Sen. Obama wouldn't outright denounce Wright, but he wants to taint Hillary by Wright's association with Bill.

    Really? Is that logical at all?

    [ Parent ]

    Right... (5.00 / 3) (#92)
    by echinopsia on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:20:27 PM EST
    If Wright is such an honorable, good guy that Obama considers him family and will not repudiate him, why is it bad for him to be seen in a photo with Bill Clinton?

    [ Parent ]
    because the purpose of the photo (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:25:56 AM EST
    is to remind the public of Clinton's impeachment.
    We knew Obama would go there eventually - even indirectly as he did with this photo.


    [ Parent ]
    Does he really think we have forgotten? (5.00 / 2) (#229)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:54:18 AM EST
    Or that we weren't enraged by it? 65% approval ratings at the height of impeachment, IIRC.

    Yeah, go ahead, remind us of how Bill got screwed. That'll help your case.

    [ Parent ]

    Um (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by txchicanoforhillary on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:28:36 PM EST
    Your using logic and Wright in the same sentence.  

    Axelrod has jumped the shark with this stunt.

    [ Parent ]

    no no.. they're blaming the Clinton's for (4.00 / 1) (#93)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:21:20 PM EST
    being behind the Wright story, then saying this photo shows their hypocrisy.

    [ Parent ]
    Seriously? (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by echinopsia on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:59:23 PM EST
    Because that's just dumb.

    Do they think people are that stupid?

    [ Parent ]

    People are that stupid... (4.00 / 1) (#150)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:05:03 AM EST
    some are...some aren't.

    But when it comes to the political game, logic tends to be irrelevant.

    [ Parent ]

    It seems like the talking points (4.00 / 1) (#185)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:28:37 AM EST
    of the blog supporters

    [ Parent ]
    This is more defense of Wright. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:33:27 PM EST
    Only the Obama Base will be swayed by this at all.

    It's a confusing move (none / 0) (#182)
    by blogtopus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:27:38 AM EST
    On one hand, you have them either condemning Bill Clinton by saying 'he did it too!', or you have them defending Wright, strangely enough by using Bill Clinton (and by extension Hillary) as a symbol of how important Wright is.

    Either way it amounts to the same thing: Obama is on the wrong side of the issue.

    [ Parent ]

    Desperation. (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Angel on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:34:27 PM EST


    But... (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by Marco21 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:34:34 PM EST
    Barack is above this kind of stuff, right? Remember him admonishing the Clinton camp for the African garb Drudge photo AFTER he said they had nothing to do with it?

    20 years (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by mookiedog on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:35:12 PM EST
    A handshake does not equal 20 years of sitting and listening to his racist hate speech and his unpatriotic speech. Get real.

    Irony: telling of Wright (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:35:15 PM EST
    Wright attended that event in the White House, when Bill was basically confessing and going through an act of contrition with the ministers.  When Wright, made fun of Bill from the pulpit, he basically was violating the Christian core belief of forgiveness.  

    Interesting (none / 0) (#37)
    by xspowr on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:51:26 PM EST
    That was the first thing I picked up on too, all the ironies converging in this single photograph. While it's probably just coincidence, it also seems a bit tacky to release it right on the heels of the tasteless ABC and AP stories linking the "blue dress" episode to Hillary's calendar. Lots of negative connotations here, and doesn't seem to do much vis-a-vis defusing the Wright problem for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    Question to Obama blogs (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:37:28 PM EST
    If Wright is toxic at this point, and Obama's campaign associates him with Bill Clinton, are they not giving fodder to the McCain campaign?  

    Are they not doing anything to win?  Are they not destroying the Democratic party to save themselves?  

    I am so glad I didn't have anything in my (none / 0) (#12)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:38:41 PM EST
     mouth to spew when I read that comment.
    Second best comment of the night!!

    [ Parent ]
    Honored..spew and all (none / 0) (#16)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:40:02 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    in their mind (none / 0) (#28)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:45:22 PM EST
    Clinton is no longer a Democrat.

    [ Parent ]
    True (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by vigkat on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:49:27 PM EST
    That's because she is a Monster, all the more easily vilified.

    [ Parent ]
    KarlRovian shoe on the other foot (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Chimster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:38:23 PM EST
    Obama campaign leaking a picture of Bill with Wright. Similar to picture leaking of Bill and Rezko. That's two similar tactics that are not only pathetic, and ineffective, but will liekly destroy Obama's campaign plans of taking the high road.

    Hmm.. This is also the pattern of the leak that included Obama in muslim garb. Sounds like a hat trick to me.

    Can I renew my delcaration (5.00 / 8) (#15)
    by andgarden on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:39:47 PM EST
    that there is not now, nor has there ever been, a "new kind of politics" from Obama.

    This just pisses me off more about his phony baloney political style.

    I used to do theatre (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by kmblue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:40:59 PM EST
    and we called this "flop sweat".

    Flop sweat? (none / 0) (#21)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:42:06 PM EST
    explain....

    [ Parent ]
    Flop sweat (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by kmblue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:43:16 PM EST
    You know the show you are performing in is a stinker, you know the audience knows it, and you have to perform anyway.
    So you sweat.
    Flop sweat.

    [ Parent ]
    Can you complete the analogy? (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:44:03 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    lest there be any doubt (none / 0) (#25)
    by kmblue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:44:40 PM EST
    I am referring to the Obama campaign in the
    aftermath of Wright.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks! I'd heard the phrase before (none / 0) (#30)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:46:28 PM EST
    but didn't understand it.
    Good analogy.

    [ Parent ]
    justifying her continued association with Bill because he is "like family." The Clinton campaign must be devastated!

    It will be her "Socks" speech, (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:47:36 PM EST
    Expect some judicious tears.

    [ Parent ]
    LOL (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by kmblue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:47:56 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Hilarious (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Prabhata on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:51:37 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, that proves Clinton's a racist (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by lambert on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:48:22 PM EST
    Oh, wait...

    Obama falls from grace (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by Prabhata on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:49:01 PM EST
    Obama allowed race to become an issue and he is keeping it alive.  He is now just another African American candidate with narrow support.  I support HRC, but I'm sad for Obama. He could have been a candidate that appealed to everyone, but that opportunity is gone.

    It's not Obama's fault that race was an issue; (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:51:12 PM EST
    I think he handled the issue in a two-faced way, using surrogates to attack the Clinton's as racist, while calling for civility.
    Had he actually been generous and above the fray with regards to stray ill-considered comments, he would have garnered a lot of sympathy and respect, IMO.

    [ Parent ]
    He handled the issue in a two-faced way (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Prabhata on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:58:23 PM EST
    But it's not Obama's fault that race was an issue.  I don't get the logic.  Those in the Democratic Party that would have come to his defense, people like me who would have wanted a strong candidate in November, did not lift a finger.  I spoke to a talk radio today and said exactly what you say here.  He benefited from the race card and only gave the speech when racism was used against him.

    [ Parent ]
    It IS Obama's fault that race was (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by BlueMerlin on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:42:07 PM EST
    made an issue.   His campaign took every opportunity to inject race into the election.   They pushed "The Bradley Effect" issue with the media after NH.   They made ridiculous charges of racism against Hillary's statement regarding LBJ and MLK, and Bill's claim that black votes for Obama would put SC out of reach for Hillary (well duh, every CNN pundit was saying the same thing).   They counted the number of black children in the "3 am" ad, found the number wanting and made an issue of that.    They went after Ferraro deliberately, digging up comments to the "Coast Breeze" (what the heck is that?) -- comments which, BTW, were identical to comments made by Obama himself and now today made by Kerry.  

    See "Race Man" by Sean Wilenz in The New Republic.

    [ Parent ]

    Someone pointed out before (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by felizarte on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:00:57 AM EST
    that the Wright issue is not a racial one; it is anti-American.  It is the equivalent of the Jane Fonda excursion into Hanoi.  It crossed the line; went beyond being anti-war into being anti-American.

    [ Parent ]
    Not just anti-American in the war sense either (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by RalphB on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:10:49 AM EST
    it's also that he's a nutjob who's peddling that ludicrous conspiracy theory about AIDS.  I don't know how anyone can defend that guy in good faith.


    [ Parent ]
    Here is Ferraro ion being (none / 0) (#196)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:31:54 AM EST
    included in The Speech:

    LA TIMES

    [ Parent ]

    Its Obama's fault that race is an (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by ding7777 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:47:39 PM EST
    issue within the Democratic Party - an issue that has divided the DP.

    Had Obama not used race and if he was the nominee, the Democratic Party could have backed him come Oct when Fox would have released the tapes anyway

    [ Parent ]

    I don't care for Obama (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by facta non verba on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:12:15 AM EST
    but now he is crossing into the realm of truly pathetic.

    This Wright pre 9/11 and pre God Damn America and pre Hillary ain't ever been called this and that.

    Doesn't Obama that this is grasping at straws? It was the same thing as the picture of the Clintons with Tony Rezko at a Carol Mosley Braun event. That too came from the Obama campaign. Rolling my eyes.

    [ Parent ]

    Al Gore (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by xspowr on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:57:24 PM EST
    is also in the photo, so I guess that blows any chance he'll swoop in and save us all come convention time!

    The ironies keep coming (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Stellaaa on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:00:24 PM EST
    Remember when the blogoshrills went nuts when Bill implied that Obama was like Jackson?  If Bill was a racist, why did he invite him to the White House?  

    Do tell me now, what are they going to do, show pics of Bill with Jackson?  Is Bill now black again?  These people have gone off the deep edge.  They created a story, but now the story is not holding up.  If they just let Obama be who he was and given him a few more years to get experience, maybe it would have worked.  But, they got really fooled by their own cleverness.  

    Kiss the Democratic White House goodbye.  

    And why did he, as a sitting President, (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by BlueMerlin on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:44:40 PM EST
    give a speech on race to the Million Man March in 1995?   That speech was just as deep and symbolic and meaningful as the one Obama just gave, but NOT coerced by being in a jam.   His came from the heart.  Toni Morrison called him "The first black president".   And then the Obama campaign thanks him by smearing him with racism charges.  Boy that's the sign of a real "uniter" isn't it?

    [ Parent ]
    Let's compare the two : (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by InkSlayer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:02:23 PM EST
    Clinton:

    Reverend Wright is a man Clinton met at the White House for 30 seconds.(doesn't look like he's even paying attention to him really)

    Obama:

    Reverend Wright is the man Obama calls his mentor and adviser.

    The man Obama says helps keep his priorities straight and his moral compass calibrated.

    The man who Obama calls his political sounding board.

    The man who Obama personally thanked for his successful 2004 Senate race.

    The man who Obama consulted with before deciding to run for president and who he prayed with privately before announcing his candidacy.

    The man Obama believes so much in that he has given thousands of dollars to.

    The man whose sermon inspired Obama's book "The Audacity of Hope" (He must have been listening that day - LOL)

    The man Obama chose to marry him and his wife and baptist his children.

    The man whose church Obama is loyal to even after it gave Farrakhan a lifetime achievement award.

    I could go on, but why confuse the trivial with the serious.


    Well if you really want to compare (1.00 / 0) (#151)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:05:28 AM EST
    you should question Hillary Clinton's ties to right-wing Christians and The Fellowship (or Family).

    Wright stands for social justice. Right-wing Christians do not.

    [ Parent ]

    since you are making the claim (none / 0) (#245)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:44:07 AM EST
    you support it with facts.  

    Pretty weak to make a claim and then tell someone else to disprove you.  

    But since you like to generalize I will too.  Do you know what a politician's job is?  Oh, you think it is to do the will of the people.  No, the job of a politician is to get elected.  Politicians can't get elected without making strange bedfellows---thus the cliche.  The Clintons have been making political allies and enemies since before Obama was old enough to have a drug habit.  The problem with your accusation is that all politicians have skeletons in their closet, all politicians have made that deal with their personal devil---not some, all.  Sure there are degrees of bad, Rezco is no Abramoff for example.  But we still, in effect, don't know thing one about Obama's past because the media is adamant about protecting his 'cleaner than Hillary' image.  And not one of Obama's supporters has proven a single claim about Hillary's perceived "scandal in waiting" accusations.  You just keep throwing out names and possibilities with the hope that something might stick.  They aren't sticking because they are manufactured.  

    On kos the other day there was a diary about campaign donors.  95% of big banks made hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to both Obama and Clinton (cept you guys think that Obama doesn't accept anything but 20 buck donations from bloggers) but the 5% of donors Clinton had that Obama didn't meant something had to be fishy....Bear/Stearns in financial trouble, they donated to Hillary BAM, GOT HER, Hillary is responsible for the collapse of the mortgage market.  That is all it was, no facts just claims of impropriety because a Wall St name was in financial trouble and had donated to Hillary and not Obama.  

    Keep grasping at straws.  Just try and back up your claims instead of settling for making baseless claims.

    [ Parent ]

    Reminds me of when I was a kid (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by txchicanoforhillary on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:02:26 PM EST
    and I would screw up and my Mom would be in the process of determining punishment.  I would, in my STUPIDITY, try to deflect my own bad behavior and try to make trouble for my siblings by making them look bad.

    My Mom was too smart and this ploy never worked.  I got my just desserts.  Let's hope that Obama and his campaign gets theirs, too.

    i urge obama to pull out of this (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by hellothere on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:20:26 PM EST
    race now for the good of the party and the nation. that felt good!

    You just had to (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by kmblue on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:23:30 PM EST
    get that off your chest, didn't you, hellothere?
    (smile)

    [ Parent ]
    actually it was half snark! (none / 0) (#99)
    by hellothere on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:25:21 PM EST
    but i do get weary of hearing these folks telling hillary to get out of the race.

    [ Parent ]
    There is (of course) a diary on the (none / 0) (#94)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:22:19 PM EST
    wreck list at Orange Republic saying Clinton must drop out, by the aptly named "EternalHope"

    [ Parent ]
    what a shame! i just don't see (none / 0) (#98)
    by hellothere on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:24:29 PM EST
    things improving there down the road. it would take a major cleanup and i don't see it happening.

    [ Parent ]
    The way things are going, I think there's a good (none / 0) (#105)
    by MarkL on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:30:22 PM EST
    chance Obama's fall (if it happens) will be seen as largely his own fault, because he made poor choices and didn't anticipate the fallout. In that case, it will be easier to accept Hillary.
    I'm in a red state where Obama has no chance, so I have no dilemma if Obama is the nominee; however, if I were in a contested state, I will be very unhappy to vote for him, because I consider him manifestly unqualified; in combination with his arrogance, he reminds me too much of Bush.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't kid yourself (none / 0) (#212)
    by jen on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:39:12 AM EST
    IF O falls, the O supporters will honestly and fully believe it was all Clinton's fault. They have set it up to be true, and they will believe it 'til their dying day.

    [ Parent ]
    I respectfully disagree (none / 0) (#219)
    by tree on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:46:29 AM EST
    Obama love is like a fan phenomenon. With time they will all  mistakenly remember that they were the only ones who didn't fall for the fad.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm not so sure... (5.00 / 1) (#238)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:13:04 AM EST
    There are people who...to this day...still blame Yoko.

    [ Parent ]
    Female Blogger of the Year (5.00 / 3) (#227)
    by facta non verba on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:51:28 AM EST
    Over at Women's Voices. Women's Vote they are sponsoring a vote on female blogger of the year.

    I think our dear friend Jeralyn Merritt is one worthy gal.

    http://www.wvwv.org/

    I nominated Jeralyn (none / 0) (#246)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 01:54:59 AM EST
    I recommend others do it too.

    She has courage, dedication, high principles, discipline, and tolerance and if she were running for president instead of female blogger of the year - I'd vote for Hillary.

    But it would be a tough decision.

    [ Parent ]

    well, (4.00 / 2) (#97)
    by TheRefugee on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:24:02 PM EST
    Wright can't be that bad a guy if "the first Black President (er, worst race-baiter in the history of the free world???)" is shaking hands with the guy.

    Only problem?  Clinton having met Wright is not the same as sitting in beneath Wright's pulpit while Wright spewed extreme sermons on race, politics, economics, etc.  Not the same thing as calling Wright a "mentor".  Not the same thing as Wright being a close personal friend who you could no more disown than your grandmother.

    Wow, Clinton met Wright...if it proves Wright isn't a bad guy then doesn't it prove Clinton is not the racially divisive figure Obama and staff claim he is?  Not sure what the goal in distributing the photo was....other than that OBAMA is scared that he has absolutely lost all momentum and that voters are no longer buying into the "Obama is as infallible as his nomination is inevitable" meme.

    Democrats used to agree (1.00 / 1) (#149)
    by RLMcCauley on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:04:15 AM EST
    that imperialism and oppression were bad things.

    [ Parent ]
    Ok (1.00 / 1) (#147)
    by stopcomplainingandact on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:03:11 AM EST
    1. How do we know Obama supplied this picture?  
    2. Sounds like the Republican campaign is working the Democrats are in a sad state.
    3. Clinton started the mud slinging, Obama is not a god he is a person if you attack him he will defend himself.  Holding him to a higher standard while his opponent takes cheap shots is not fair or reasonable
    4. Clinton said McCain would be a better commander and chief
    5. Clinton sent a surrogate to ask Obama questions today to keep Wright in the news and in the forefront
    6. Obama is winning and unless your willing to break the sanctity of Democracy your hating on your candidate for the Presidency of the US
    7. THE MOST IMPORTANT - OBAMA OR CLINTON CAN NOT WIN WITHOUT UNIFIED SUPPORT
    8. DO YOU WANT THE IRAQ WAR TO END, DO YOU WANT HEALTH INSURANCE FOR ALL AMERICANS, DO YOU WANT TAX BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS, DO YOU WANT A BETTER EDUCATION SYSTEM FOR YOURSELF AND YOUR CHILDREN.  GUESS WHAT BOTH CANDIDATES OFFER THE SIMILAR POLICIES FOR ALL OF THESE.  SO JUMP OFF THE NO WE CAN'T AND ON TO THE YES WE CAN.  CAST YOUR VOTE AND COUNT THEM UP AND THEN JUMP ON BOARD WITH THE WINNER.  


    I agree with 7 and 8 (5.00 / 0) (#221)
    by Marvin42 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:48:54 AM EST
    And that is why I voted for Hillary in the primary and will gladly vote for her in the GE.

    As for rest:

    1. Read the NYT article, it says supplied by Obama campaign.
    2. They don't need to, we are doing a fine job snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by ourselves.
    3. Not true, Obama did it too, he just fooled some people into thinking he wasn't doing it.
    4. Try reading the actual quote, rather than repeating incorrect talking point.
    5. Link please. Also unless you have turned off all news channels no one needed to keep the story alive. And Obama didn't help by his "typical white woman" comment.
    6. There is no winning. There is "won" and "lost." Neither has happened yet.


    [ Parent ]
    If (none / 0) (#159)
    by rose city on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:12:18 AM EST
    you insist on posting an incoherent rant, would you mind not putting it in caps? It's considered shouting.

    [ Parent ]
    How we know (none / 0) (#177)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:25:57 AM EST
    Among those in attendance, was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., who is seen shaking hands with Mr. Clinton in a photograph provided today by the Obama campaign. Mr. Wright's relationship with Senator Barack Obama, as his longtime pastor, has been the subject of considerable controversy in recent days because of incendiary excerpts of sermons Mr. Wright gave at their church, Trinity United Church of Christ, in Chicago.

    source of pic


    [ Parent ]
    Didn't find source (none / 0) (#184)
    by stopcomplainingandact on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:27:52 AM EST
    Your source link is not active, who was the source?

    [ Parent ]
    The source (none / 0) (#194)
    by xspowr on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:31:44 AM EST
    is the New York Times article linked in Jeralyn's original post. Here it is once again:

    NYT

    [ Parent ]

    link correction (none / 0) (#205)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:35:45 AM EST
    source is in her quote (none / 0) (#207)
    by RalphB on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:36:47 AM EST
    from the NYTimes article, the Obama campaign.

    [ Parent ]
    2 thru 8 are memo (none / 0) (#190)
    by tree on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:30:51 AM EST
    talking points, but if you are serious about question 1, we know the photo came from the Obama campaign because the NYT said so, and the Obama campaign has not denied it.

    [ Parent ]
    Now your (1.00 / 1) (#218)
    by stopcomplainingandact on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:44:33 AM EST
    attacking me! I was just asking a question and asking for unity in our party.  Adults can have discussions without being offended.  I'm not offended by peoples comments. I am an Obama supporter does that make my point of view less relevent.  If Obama provided the pictures then he did.  It doesn't affect my belief that we are attacking the wrong person or the wrong party for that fact.  If you believe so strongly in your convictions then debate them on merit.

    Are you questioning the (none / 0) (#222)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:49:11 AM EST
    NYTimes contention of the source?  our comments as to why would the Obama campaign release the photo?  The contention that Hillary should defend Wright?  What do you want to discuss?

    [ Parent ]
    Um...we have been (none / 0) (#225)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:50:44 AM EST
    for pages and pages.
    Your all cap rant contains attacks on Clinton.
    But never mind.
    I've read your comments.
    You needn't read mine.

    [ Parent ]
    No (1.00 / 1) (#228)
    by stopcomplainingandact on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:53:05 AM EST