Why don't we just come out and say it in not so nice words?
Isn't using 'dog whistle politics' the same as playing a race card? I suppose once someone really says it though, then an opportunity is custom made to find offense.
Set your own ball on the T, and hit it out of the field. Nice.
Posted by jcricket at January 10, 2008 07:02 AMOh, and BTW, if JJackson Jr wants to actually go after Hillary re: Katrina, then he is going to have to ignore her legislation that was voted down by a republican senate. What a special man.
Posted by jcricket at January 10, 2008 07:06 AMJJ Jr. is a Jerk to imply that HRC did not do anything about Katrina. She was the leading critic of the Bush administration handling of Katrina disaster. She even introduced a bill to create bi-partisan commission to improve disaster response.
Even Obama voted to yea to this bill. It was voted down by rethugs. Here is the link if somebody wants to read about it http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00229
Here is the link for her 10 point plan called Gulf coast recovery plan
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeech2/a/ClintonKatrina.htm
I think, Obama should fire JJ Jr. ass. This guy is lying to the people of SC and Neveda when he is implying that HRC did not do any thing.
And to top it off, President Clinton raised more than 100 million for Katrina disaster recovery.
I ask, What did JJ Jr. did?
What specifically Obama did for Katrina victims?
I agree that Jesse Jackson Sr. probably is and certainly should be ashamed of his son AND that Sen. Obama himself, should condemn the language. We have enough dog whistles coming from the Dark Side of the Farce.
That said, however, are you really so over the top that in this campaign that you truly believe: he deserves a user account in the Free Republic or deserves to write a Recommended Diary at Daily Kos makes the slightest bit of sense?
Get some perspective!
Posted by DeminNewJ at January 10, 2008 07:10 AMThe kiss of death is coming...John Kerry is set to endorse B. Obama today.
Posted by peter at January 10, 2008 07:11 AMJackson is working hard to make clear for everybody what George McGovern did when he threw Eagleton under the bus within two days after backing him up 1000%. I never trust a political campaign which claims it's a "new kind" of politics. Generally, that politician advances that claim quickly because they're really just the most recent Tammany ward heeler trying to move up the ranks while donning camouflage. As a voter, I'm always looking at when it's becomes my time to be thrown under the bus by the guy.
Posted by PrahaPartizan at January 10, 2008 07:23 AMOh, loser John Kerry endorses? That will sure swing a lot of votes.
I'd be a lot more concerned who Bill Richardson might endorse before Nevada.
Posted by Horselover Fat at January 10, 2008 07:35 AMDonna Brazile has implied that Bill Clinton is a racist for the fairytale remark.
I don't think that is going to fly or get Obama any votes in SC. If Donna and JJJ turn this into a race war, white suburbia will freak out and bury Barock.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 10, 2008 07:40 AMIf there is a drop in Obama support due to the impending Kerry endorsement, I think Edwards will pick up more of that swing than Hillary. Edwards is the other "agent of change"/AOTH candidate. Also, looking at the most recent polls (even though we all know how accurate they can be) from the Plain States (like Iowa), Edwards is polling higher than Obama. Don't count him out yet.
Posted by the professor at January 10, 2008 07:44 AMRichardson is endorsing Clinton ---no surprise there. I saw a blurb over at TPM>
Kerry's endorsement isn't going to sway many people.
"Kerry's endorsement isn't going to sway many people."....Mark, you have an xtra m in there, should read "ANY people".
Posted by TIKI AL at January 10, 2008 08:20 AM"dog whistle politics" isn't a code for "playing the race card" its its own phrase which means "trying to signal something to one part of your base while assuring plausible denial to another part of your base or to the mass media." The only problem with applying it to JJ's remarks is that its so clumsy it should be called a "shout out" to racial division. *none*of our candidates as democrats are anti black in any meaningful sense of the term. To pretend they are is just shameful and also quite stupid since it only plays into republican hands. All the talk of the "racism" of the voters who didn't vote for BO and this twisted, silly, talk of "for whom should she have cried" when she *didn't cry at all* is just absurd. If they want to attack her on her policies *let them do so* but it would open up a discussion of policy and programs that BO wants to avoid. By all means lets have all our candidates tell us *exactly what they would do* in the first 100 days--I'd like to hear each and everyone of them speak to Katrina and its "clean up", promise to defenestrate Lieberman (who has been holding up everything), promise to clean the DOJ from top to bottom, promise to enforce environmental laws, pour money into health care, etc...etc...etc... If Obama wants my vote-damn it--he can *offer me something* that I want. I don't want the politics of change--I want *change* to the left *through* politics.
aimai
Posted by aimai at January 10, 2008 08:24 AMMark, you have an xtra m in there, should read "ANY people".
No kidding. Who would really stop and say to themselves "Well, now that Kerry has endorsed Obama, I'm outtie! Hillary, here's my vote." Not that people aren't that superficial, but c'mon, Kerry? I'm surprised it even got a blurb on the news.
And didn't I hear that Edwards and Kerry didn't like each other much?
Posted by iamcoyote at January 10, 2008 08:26 AMI'd run from what Todd says here, Eriposte, not embrace it.
"Dog Whistle Politics?" That's what they called Reagan's embrace of the Southern Strategy. Why don't you call the Israelis Nazis? It's not equivalent, but it's about the same in terms of insulting and confusing history.
Your assertions that African-American people love Bill Clinton so much are ridiculous, too. Every African-American I know used to flinch over that b.s. about Bill Clinton being "the first black president." Talk about insulting. Even if it were true that African-Americans liked Bill, Hillary's not Bill. And you talk about pandering, do you have any idea how demeaning and insulting your assertions could be taken here? "Yes, mas-suh, yes. Mas-suh Clinton, he sho-nuff was good to us, gave us lots of jobs in his cab'net, yes mas-suh!" Jesus, Eriposte, that's what I hear when you talk about all Bill did for African-Americans, I can only imagine what it would be like, how bad it would be, to be black and hear that. I bet you Bill himself knows better than to take that attitude, unlike Hillary's supporters, apparently.
Jackson spoke plainly. He's talking about the complete lack of care and inaction of the Washington establishment on New Orlean's behalf, and he's implying Obama will do something about that and other issues that concern African-Americans. There is nothing secret or quiet or "dog whistle" about it. There's no code words in what he said, unlike the "Dog Whistle" phrase "states' rights.
Let's talk about what this is really about, though. Of course Jackson is addressing the concerns some of Obama's voters want to hear about, such as New Orleans. It's not about that. It's about what I've said repeatedly. This is about the fact that the "minority vote" will not go to Clinton, and she needs it to get elected. But she won't get it. Because African-Americans can stand on their own, they don't need Hillary's help for that, and Obama is a lot more than just racial identity politics. He draws plenty of other votes besides, because he's simply American, as apple pie. She can't win. Go Google polls for South Carolina and Nevada if you don't believe me.
Posted by Brian Bell at January 10, 2008 08:31 AMAll I saw was speculation about a potential Richardson endorsement, saw no beef.
Lot's of hispanics in Nevada was my point, unless Richardson endorses otherwise, they likely tend towards Clinton.
Posted by Horselover Fat at January 10, 2008 08:34 AMOlder, religious Hispanics will lean Clinton. Younger Hispanics will lean Obama.
This Hispanic family in Arizona is for Edwards.
He's the only one who has mentioned the disabled and corporate greed.
Brian, that was just disgusting. You jumped the shark yesterday, now you're humping it here. You are not helping your candidate, you're just making yourself look bad.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 10, 2008 08:48 AMWhat exactly is disgusting about what I said, Iamcoyote? There's no helping people who are so attached to Hillary they say things even the Clintons would never dare say. What Jackson Jr. said was perfectly fine, perfectly legitimate, nothing "dog whistle" about it. All that's happening now is the Washington branch of the Democratic party establishment and their friends -- that's the Clintons -- are trying to attack Obama on every little thing, even things where there's nothing wrong. So, anyway, tell me, Iamcoyote, how is it not a disgusting bit of pandering to talk about how great the Clintons were for African-Americans? It is disgusting to claim that, and it's terribly de classe. Your problem with me is my opinions are legitimate, and those opinions of mine are not coming from the right but the left. That's another problem Hillary has.
Posted by Brian Bell at January 10, 2008 09:10 AMThere absolutely should be push back. When African Americans are signaled to look at the Clintons as something bordering on rascism, then it cannot stand. They have sent out a lot of spokesman on the cable channels to make this point. And it is not subtle. Clinton should point out what he is doing and let everyone know in no uncertain terms what it will do to the Democratic Party and what it says about Obama. Because this will be a problem. And residual anger will remain. And of course there is the loyalty issue. Bill and Hillary have taken action and raised money for the African American community that Obama could only dream about. If that community forgets the long term good the Clintons have done and sees them move over to the feel good now candidate...then if she wins, she should remember that loyalty. This is terribly harmful to all Democrats. And Obama is much more self concerned than concerned about the Party and its principles. We should keep pushing back hard...No need to be subtle or nice here. Donna Brazille was explicit. And I don't like it one bit. Big dems should be speaking out against this type of behavior...or it will come back to haunt them.
Posted by lily15 at January 10, 2008 09:13 AMSo the new politics and bipartisanship of Obama means trashing Democrats while reaching out to Republicans like Tom Coburn?
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070826_1__KEYBI24770
“Senator Warner is another example of somebody with great wisdom, although I don’t always agree with him on every issue,” Obama said. “I would also seek out people like Tom Coburn, who is probably the most conservative member of the U.S. Senate. He has become a friend of mine.”
Lilly15, you aren't hearing what Jackson's saying. And these accusations against Jackson and now Donna Brazille are absurd. And, again, you're talking about everything that the Clintons have done for African-Americans. That will influence the "minority" vote -- NOT. More like, that will insult the "minority" vote.
All Jackson did was address a few issues important to the African-American community, and indeed the whole American community, that's all he did. No more, no less. All Donna did was point out how Bill's words could be taken badly. She didn't say he was racist.
You know, I think it's the white people who are reacting with racism here, not Obama's African-American supporters. It is terribly demeaning and belittling and ugly pandering to say, "Look at everything the Clintons have done for you," implicitly questioning the African-American community's "loyatly," as if the Clintons did anything to earn loyalty from an entire ethnicity. Like I said, African-Americans can stand on their own, thank you. As can Obama.
Posted by at January 10, 2008 09:29 AMJesus-Bobby Kennedy-Santa Claus has painted himself into a corner. Dirty, stinky, dog whistle politics are a lot more unbecoming on someone who sells himself as the big time agent of change and a new brand of politics. It will be another tough come down for the Great Orange Frathouse when they realize they've picked yet another loser in Him. (Markos hearts Hillary, it's her people that he can't stand, heh heh heh).
Watch how fast He (I'm speaking of Jesus-Bobby Kennedy-Santa Claus) folds if he wins the primary, which I predict, He won't.
Posted by brycer martini at January 10, 2008 09:38 AMI, too, as an Obama admirer, was DEEPLY offeded by Jesse Jackson Jr's comments yesterday connecting Hillary's tears to Katrina, implying she didn't care about Katrina victims and using subtle racist suggestions to dog whistle to the blacks in South Carolina.
It was a cheap and tawdry trick.
If Obama doesn't "handle" this, and speak up against the claims that New Hampshire voters were "racist" or that Clinton didn't care about Katrina,
his claims of a "new" politics are completely false.
Earn it on the issues, Obama, but CONDEMN these false attacks using race to your advantage.
Otherwise, you represent NOTHING new.
Posted by Mary at January 10, 2008 09:43 AMI have written before why people should not presume the surprise victory of Clinton in NH (short version: she won on the same hackable Diebold machines that threw Ohio in 2004, while she lost hand-counted votes; longer version, go to Brad Blog).
Now I will tell all of you why you ignore this at your own peril: 1.) stealing elections is not good for democracy; 2.) if Clinton is the Democratic candidate this will be brought up by the Republicans in the general election, and they will beat her with it over and over. And the MSM will go along. I can see the cover of Time Mag. A picture of Hillary with the caption "Thief."
Just saying.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at January 10, 2008 09:50 AMI'd be very careful if I were Obama about the upcoming Black vote in South Carolina.
The connection between the Clintons and the black community is the real deal. Hillary does not have to win the majority. If she cuts deep into that vote then look out.
Posted by Daryl at January 10, 2008 10:04 AMBob, you forgot 3) Too many knee-jerk and false allegations of hacking tends to make people less likely to believe the instances of tampering.
Maybe this will calm you down a bit.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 10, 2008 10:08 AMAnd you can believe there are some people within Black leadership circles who don't have a problem sticking it to Jesse Jackson Jr.
Posted by Daryl at January 10, 2008 10:09 AMBill Clinton was poor and southern. Hillary Clinton came from Winetka, Illinois, neither poor nor southern.
How much of black people's affinity for Bill Clinton will transfer to Hillary would be an interesting inquiry. I haven't seen that issue addressed anywhere.
Because I almost never watch television, but spend much more time than I should on the internet, I've been struck by the extent of organized nastiness among Obama supporters. Check out the recommended diaries section on dKos this morning. Now they're harping that John Edwards should quit, some comparing him to Ralph Nader.
If he is the nominee, I hope Obama can run other parts of his campaign as well as he has his internet whispering and dog whistle operations. And I hope he as adept at using them on Republicans as he has on his fellow Democrats.
Posted by kaleidescope at January 10, 2008 10:50 AMpants pissing peter: The kiss of death is coming...John Kerry is set to endorse B. Obama today.
too bad that over 3900 American troops have received the kiss of death from Dear Leader's war of aggression in Iraq
Posted by Gay Veteran at January 10, 2008 11:43 AM"He's using some odious dog-whistle politics here, trying to send the message to African Americans (in other words: South Carolina) that, to borrow a phrase, Hillary Clinton doesn't care about black people."
I'm no fan of Hillary (and I'm sure as hell not a fan of Obama), but I knew just as soon as I read it that this was indeed "dog-whistle politics"
Posted by Gay Veteran at January 10, 2008 11:45 AMkaleidescope:
That's a good point. The affinity is definitely for the Big Dog. It's anybody's guess on what proportion of the Black Community looks at it like a package deal. They may just figure they're getting 2 for 1.
Now they're harping that John Edwards should quit, some comparing him to Ralph Nader.
Ouch. That's gratitude especially after he ran interference in the last debate. Unless he's auditioning for vice pres then somewhere down the line Edwards is going have to start attacking Obama. If the stories are true then he owes him that much for letting Obama talk him off the ballot in Michigan.
Posted by Daryl at January 10, 2008 11:53 AM1. People who assert that Obama has the black vote sewn up are kidding themselves. It has fluctuations, but it's pretty split. Clinton has an advantage with black women. Obama with black men.
2. Defending dog-whistle politics, and calling whites racist for pointing it out, is inane. It is what it is - shameful race-baiting.
Posted by Moses at January 10, 2008 12:59 PM"...but this is offensive garbage from Jesse Jackson, Jr., Sen. Obama's national campaign co-chair" -- Eriposte
Agreed. I had been favoring Obama over Clinton, but now I'm not so sure, if these are the kind of guys who advise him. Truly a low blow from Mr. Jackson.
Posted by Herman at January 10, 2008 04:41 PM