January 13, 2008
Obama Responds
Barack Obama's campaign sent out the candidate's response to Hillary Clinton ... His remarks were made in a conference call this a.m. with reporters.
Obama: "This is fascinating to me. I mean I think what we saw this morning is why the American people are tired of Washington politicians and the games they play. But Senator Clinton made an unfortunate remark, an ill-advised remark, about King and Lyndon Johnson. I didn’t make the statement. I haven’t remarked on it, and she I think offended some folks who felt that somehow diminished King’s role in bringing about the Civil Rights Act.
"She is free to explain that, but the notion that somehow this is our doing is ludicrous. I have to point out that instead of telling the American people about her positive vision for America, Senator Clinton spent an hour talking about me and my record in a way that was flat out wrong.
"She suggested that I didn’t clearly and unambiguously oppose the war in Iraq when it is absolutely clear and anyone who has followed this knows that I did. I stood up against the war when she was voting for it, at a time when she didn’t read the intelligence reports or give diplomacy a chance. She belittled the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate despite the fact that she stood on the sidelines during that negotiations on that bill.
"I have to say that she started this campaign saying that she wanted to make history and lately she has been spending a lot of time rewriting it. I know that in Washington it is acceptable to say or do anything it takes to get elected but I really don’t think that is the kind of politics that is good for our party and I don’t think it is good for our country and I think that the American people will reject it in this election."
Posted at 11:28 AM
Comments
way to go Barack!
Shondra | 01.13.08 11:51 AM
 |
way to go Barack!
Shondra | 01.13.08 11:51 AM
|
Heres a question for you: Why did the usually tough Tim Russert turn into a puppy dog during this morning's interview?
James Rutenbeck | 01.13.08 11:56 AM
|
Good job Senator Obama. The politics of hope doesn't mean hoping that you can lye on your opponents and get away with it as the Clintons have succeeded in doing thus far.
Keep calling them out and you'll win the nomination.
F. Igwealor | 01.13.08 12:01 PM
|
The New York Times is starting to have a bad reputation; it is allowing reporters and columnists to edit Hillary Clinton’s comments and then bash her based on that edited version.
The FACT is that although Martin Luther King was extremely active in the Civil Rights cause during the President Kennedy years, Kennedy was never able to move the stalled civil rights legislation through Congress. After Kennedy was assassinated and Lyndon Johnson became president, LBJ used his knowledge of how to get things done in the Congress (where he had served as a powerful leader in both the House and senate) along with the emotion built up by the murder of Kennedy to get the historic Civil Rights bill passed and the voting rights bill passed the following year.
At the time LBJ signed the long-desired Civil Rights bill, he remarked that he had lost the South to the Democratic party for at least the next 25 years — and that prediction turned out to be true.
Not only that, but LBJ’s skill and courage in pushing and then signing that legislation led to a lot of hatred toward him that smolders still. Today, most younger people know only that LBJ is reviled for his Vietnam war failures, but few know how skillfully he worked to get the Civil Rights and voting rights legislation passed.
Of course, it was the courage and bravery and leadership skill of Dr. King and his colleagues plus the activism of this nation’s black population that created the national awareness that something had to be done to protect blacks and make it possible for them to enjoy the promise of America’s Constitutionally-guaranteed rights. but Dr. King was not in Congress and had no way to write or pass legislation and had to persuade those who were in legislative office to do the right thing. For years, those in Congress did not get the legislation passed. LBJ did get the legislation moving successfully through Congress, using his celebrated strong-arm methods when necessary and his persuasive skills when possible. Maybe another president might have been able to get the job done, but the fact is that none of them did — until LBJ did.
That takes NOTHING away from Dr. King’s historic leadership and courage; it merely states that Congress had to pass the legislation and the president had to sign it to make Dr. King’s courageous efforts result in laws.
When President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves in the rebellious states, he was NOT the only one who had worked to end slavery, yet I don’t see anyone talking about that. Many white and black abolitionists died in the cause of freeing the slaves yet no one says it is disrespectful to THEIR contribution to recognize what Lincoln did.
So, why are extremists, today, saying it is disrespectful toward Dr. King to say that LBJ got the Civil Rights and voting rights bills moving successfully through Congress (where they had been stalled for years) and then signed that legislation turning Dr. King’s dream into reality?
It takes nothing from Dr. King anymore than saying Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation takes credit away from those earlier martyrs.
As far as I know The NYTimes has YET to publish Hillary Clinton’s full statement — in the print edition — and persists in allowing reporters to bash her based on the “skillfully”-edited version that suits their agenda better.
Shame on all the reporters and pundits who do the same editing and bashing.
ex-obama supporter | 01.13.08 12:06 PM
|
Couldn't agree more. And let's not forget the Clinton campaign's mailing to NH women which comletely distorted Obama's stellar record on choice.
Susan | 01.13.08 12:09 PM
|
"My "couldn't agree more" post was agreeing with Senator Obama's remarks.... not with what was posted just prior to my post.
Susan | 01.13.08 12:15 PM
|
Tim Russert, I think, has been feeling the heat about the media supposedly jumping on the NY junior Senator.
For me, it was actually funny to see her dip and dive around the issues. In particular, the fact that she also voted for the $$ to keep the war going. She selectively chooses which parts of 'her husband's" record she wants to own up to.
It's hard work to keep lying like that. My mother used to say "a liar is worse than a thief."
Of course they are both bad, but once a liar starts lying, they have to keep it going to save face. After a while, it gets really hard to keep all the lies straight.
ex-Clinton supporter | 01.13.08 12:49 PM
|
Here we go again Barack!!! Perhaps the reason why, I you are the Democratic Party nominee I will be looking at John McCain for president. Evidently you are a charlatan. You and your surrogates have been drawing the comparison bet you and JFK. Hillary pointed out correctly that JFK could not get the civil rights legislation passed through congress. The more politically astute LBJ did. Problem is that you do not have one, not one, single accomplishment to your name in the senate. Sing being elected to the senate you have spent your time campaigning for president. And to judge for your rhetoric, the one piece of legislation that should have meant something important to you, the designation of the Iran revolutionary guards as a terrorist organization, well, you did not show up. So a man without any measurable accomplishment, with a big ego wants to be president, and when taken to the carpet on the issues that you yourself generated, do not have the courage to address the substance. Hiding behind race. Hiding behind MLK shadow. Just plain hiding. I just wonder what kind of president you will be. George W Bush comes to mind.
robert_v | 01.13.08 01:47 PM
|
Hilary is beginning to look like such a liar.
Janice | 01.13.08 01:51 PM
|
The Hillary machine has been slowly, methodically and skillfully chipping away at this racial stuff. What- you think we are stupid? Ever since "she who is inevitable" started to think that Obama might beat her, well, she and Bill have been going all out! I have never seen Bill Clinton so mad. I must say they are good at this!
bsd | 01.13.08 03:06 PM
|
I think it's Obama who should be tagged the liar. For example:
I stood up against the war when she was voting for it, at a time when she didn’t read the intelligence reports or give diplomacy a chance.
And then Senator Obama came to Washington and a) did not use his Senatorial powers to help end the war and b) voted in favor of every bill to continue funding the war. What's up with that?
I have to say that she started this campaign saying that she wanted to make history and lately she has been spending a lot of time rewriting it.
When Obama started campaigning for the US Senate, the 2002 anti-war speech was pulled off his website until the Black Commentator made an issue of it and it was restored. Looks like someone wanted to walk that one back.
Back in October, Obama was happy to accuse Clinton, Dick Durbin, Claire McCaskill, Ben Nelson (there's 3 Obama endorsees right there) and other Democrats of agitating for war in Iran by voting for Kyl-Lieberman. Here's what an Obama mailer had to say:
"While other Democrats voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, Barack Obama opposed another Bush foreign policy fiasco."
Except Obama never opposed Kyl-Lieberman and was not even there to debate on it or vote on it. But he felt comfortable attacking Durbin and Clinton and others Dems for their votes.
Obama had better be careful when he's recklessly slinging around charges like that because there's plenty of facts to refute him.
corinne | 01.13.08 03:08 PM
|
This is perfect. The Democrats are already lowering expectations, bickering, and settling for a loss in November, and it isn't even Valentine's Day. Neither of these candidates can win. Hillary reminds me of the young Vader in that last Star Wars movie. And Obama reminds me way too much of Jimmy Carter. So why don't Democrats be Democrats already, talk about the issues that make us Democrats, and get behind the one guy who is out there, day after day, talking issues and ideas with moral clarity....John Edwards. If Hillary had any shame, she would spend tomorrow apologizing to her parents, teachers, and anyone who helped her along. That looked like Ann Coulter or Mary Matalin up there today. And Barack...try to develop a rationale for becoming President.
ahmed | 01.13.08 03:58 PM
|
This is perfect. The Democrats are already lowering expectations, bickering, and settling for a loss in November, and it isn't even Valentine's Day. Neither of these candidates can win. Hillary reminds me of the young Vader in that last Star Wars movie. And Obama reminds me way too much of Jimmy Carter. So why don't Democrats be Democrats already, talk about the issues that make us Democrats, and get behind the one guy who is out there, day after day, talking issues and ideas with moral clarity....John Edwards. If Hillary had any shame, she would spend tomorrow apologizing to her parents, teachers, and anyone who helped her along. That looked like Ann Coulter or Mary Matalin up there today. And Barack...try to develop a rationale for becoming President.
ahmed | 01.13.08 03:58 PM
|
The Clinton campaign is certainly acting desperate by launching these negative attacks. It's not good for her and certainly not good for the party. After having been the target of such attacks in the past, it's very disappointing to see her do this. For the last 20 years, we've had Bush/Clinton/Bush. Hilary Clinton is making it obvious why we don't want to follow George W. Bush with another Clinton. Isn't it time to turn the page and move America forward?
Spike3905 | 01.13.08 07:34 PM
|
For those who mock Obama for talking about uniting the country to get some good done, imagine what this country will be like after two months with HRC as President.
The acrimony will be so thick, we will all be thinking the the 1990's was a cakewalk.
RiverRed | 01.13.08 07:46 PM
|
EXCELLENT commentary, ex-obama supporter. Exactly correct on all points.
Let me add, however, that I think Sen. Clinton's remarks actually DID, untentionally, disrespect Dr. King. But NOT by in any way diminishing his crucial role in our nation's History, which in fact she didn't do At All. / Rather, in the course of trying to give the experienced, crafty, ruthless, wise-in-the-ways-of Washington LBJ his Props as the greatest Civil Rights President since Lincoln, Hillary inadvertently insulted Dr. King's memory by Implying that this mighty Moral leader, courageous Freedom crusader, and cherished national Martyr could somehow be Analogized to so puny a superficial Imitator as: Barack Obama.
The Pooka | 01.13.08 09:13 PM
|
Ms. Clinton will do anything and say anything to win. It is a shame that Obama has to waste time responding to this garbage, but that's politics.
Barack Obama is the real deal. He is exactly what this country needs. Do you really want more Clinton years? God help us.
Thankfully we don't have to vote against Clinton. We can vote FOR Obama!
Leebo | 01.13.08 10:42 PM
|
My head spins whenever hilary spins issues and blame others for what she says or does!
Barack Obama has never played the race card and that is why as a white female l love him and l will be voting for him.
Hilary accept responsibilties for your actions and words and stop blaming others.
You voted for the Iraq war and you voted for funding it, why not just accept that Barack Obama had better judgement on the Iraq war instead of distorting his record.
We need to come together as a nation to rebuild and restore our country's image to the rest of the world and we can only do that through President Barack Obama.
He has got the experience and good judgement that will move America forward.
Barack '08
julie | 01.13.08 11:39 PM
|
Way to Go, Senator Obama. Please live above the fray. This is petty politics. Senator Clinton and yourself should stick to the issues at hand affecting the American people. You are doing fine. We have moved passed the racial thing. I so admire you so please, Senator, don't get involved in the dirty politics. The Americal people will decide. Senator Clinton and her husband, I have admired over years, but I am seeing a side to them that is not pretty. I believe that Hilary only wants the power of the presidency to avenge herself of the misdeeds by the Republicans. I watch her and I see is I want to be president, for the wrong reason. I am from Canada.
Jeneve | 01.14.08 01:54 AM
|
Way to Go, Senator Obama. Please live above the fray. This is petty politics. Senator Clinton and yourself should stick to the issues at hand affecting the American people. You are doing fine. We have moved passed the racial thing. I so admire you so please, Senator, don't get involved in the dirty politics. The Americal people will decide. Senator Clinton and her husband, I have admired over years, but I am seeing a side to them that is not pretty. I believe that Hilary only wants the power of the presidency to avenge herself of the misdeeds by the Republicans. I watch her and I see is I want to be president, for the wrong reason. I am from Canada.
Jeneve | 01.14.08 01:55 AM
|
How sad that Obama can't see how much damage all this racial outrage by his supporters (over something that was NOT at all intended to be racial) is doing to his campaign. The very BEST thing he could have done was to shut down the voices of racial politics, shun the professional race baiters whose livelihood depends on there being "racism" for them to rage against. But he has chosen not to do this; he has squandered a great opportunity to show that he really IS a uniter.
What a shame that this episode may permanently tarnish Barack's image and make it impossible for him to make the claim of bringing us all together.
Sad.
Nik | 01.14.08 03:40 PM
|
Dirty politics
The Hill Bill Show of the Clintons
The voters and the Hill Bill Show of the Clintons (plural) should be ashamed of the insidious and disgraceful republican smear tactics the Clintons are using. Mark Penn is the Clintons replacement for Carl Rove – Does anyone need more convincing of how big a mistake the Hill Bill Show will be? The Republican Party will be re-energized big-time by the Hill Bill Show. Republicans are chomping at the bit to fight Hill and Bill. Do you want another 4 or 8 years of partisan bickering between republicans and democrats?
The NY Times and Meet The Press before the Nevada vote caught Hillary and Bill again lying about her Iraq war voting but it has not been discussed. These lies are just another example of what to expect with the Hill Bill Show!
NY Times 1/14/08 pg 18 Defending Iraq War Vote
How can Hillary say on Meet the Press that "Chuck Hagel, who helped draft the resolution, said it was not a vote for war" when in fact the Hagel resolution never passed and it was a Gephart agreement sponsored by Lieberman that ultimately passed?
How could both Hillary and Bill (on Larry King Live) both misrepresent or intentionally spin or make up new facts that sound good but are not true?
“Electabilty”
Is character and honesty more important than experience?
How much of Hillary’s career has been spent “in the trenches” helping the people?
Senator Obama is more qualified and has better experience than Hillary.
Campaign Promises
How do you expect Hillary to pass any of her main programs when republicans hate her, e.g., universal health care and withdrawing troops from Iraq, and keep them from being blocked by Republicans in the House and Senate?
Obama supporter | 01.23.08 11:06 AM
|
Post a comment
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
