Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Cheering a Win, Booing President Clinton


Supporters for Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., celebrate his win in the South Carolina primary in Columbia, S.C., Saturday, Jan. 26, 2008. (A.P.).

By Shailagh Murray
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- Obama supporters packed into the convention center here, cheering "We want change" as the returns rolled in, showing Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton by two to one. They booed lustily when former president Clinton appeared on the jumbo television screen. "Hey Bill! How ya doin' now?" one man yelled, as the crowd took up Obama's signature cheer, "Fired up! Ready to go!"

Anderson Love, a local veteran and Alabama native, waved a photo collage he had assembled of Obama and Martin Luther King Jr. "The dream is alive!' Anderson shouted above the din.

By Web Politics Editor  |  January 26, 2008; 8:32 PM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama , Hillary Rodham Clinton , Primaries , The Democrats  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Landslide Despite Racial Split in S.C.
Next: Jackson a Strategic Absence

Comments

The truth is... when you say "vote not based on race", it means: vote for an African American. This thing about "voting not based on race" does not apply to the African Americans. They will always vote for one of their own race. Look at the voting pattern and numbers of the African Americans. Look at South Carolina primary. The white Americans are emotionally hostaged into the line and would smartly be used by the black Americans.

Posted by: readingbetweenlines | January 29, 2008 7:18 AM | Report abuse

How any voter could throw away this pivotal moment in American history to plop the Clintons back into their seats of power is beyond me. If they are re-installed into the White House, this country will have deserved every day of the inaction and dishonesty that they are certain to bring for the next four years in Washington.

Posted by: stardustziggy936 | January 28, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

As a white NC native who was working for the Obama campaign in SC this weekend, I don't think I've ever been prouder of the South than I was when the results came in last night. That Obama got 25% of the white vote in a race against two legitimate white candidates (one with a Southern accent, the with an accent that changes everywhere she goes), and 50% of white voters under 30, made me especially proud.

Clinton's "coalition" - 1) white women, 2) people who are scared to support a clearly superior black candidate, and 3) white women who are scared to support a clearly superior black candidate - just isn't going to add up to a victory in a national election. After all the attempts to tag Obama as just a black candidate, it seems that Hillary is the one who is relying most heavily on identity politics.

Posted by: thadanderson | January 27, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

America has won something today. It has been winning it slowly for decades, but today marked a new high water mark. What is it America won? The ability to recognize the truth.

America has finally reached the point where we can put the politics of race behind us and judge a man by his character. The lies of the power hungry may have some effect, but a solid majority of Americans can see through the lies. They have finally bought into the hope for our future that Barack Obama so eloquently describes.

At least it appears that way. Perhaps it's only an anomaly of South Carolina. Here's hoping that the lies told by the Clinton campaign, and reported by the media, will also be rejected by the rest of America.

We will find out February 5th. And if the honest, inspiring, leader named BARACK OBAMA is successful that day, then America is saved. For it will mean that our votes really matter. It will mean we've truly restored our democracy for the benefit of all Americans. And truthfully, it'll be a day I will be more proud than ever to call myself an American.

Posted by: edhere | January 27, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama's win was impressive, not because of his winning margin over Hillary, but because he outpolled McCain and Huckabee combined in one of the most conservative Red states. I think this indicates his ability in a general election to put at least some, if not all of the South in play. The challenge for him now is to show that he can appeal to hispanics, working-class white women, and seniors, all of whom are important parts of the Democratic base.

I see a lot of Bill and Hillary haters on this blog, as usual. Aside from the fact that it's stupid and destructive to spew venom at two major figures in your own party, you're totally missing the point of what is happening. Having to compete against a tough opponent like Hillary will bring out the best in Obama. It drives him to be even more eloquent and passionate, and forces him to come up with policy positions as nuanced and well-thought-out as hers. If he can beat her, he'll be ready for anything or anyone the Republicans can throw at him. That's what the primary season is all about.

Posted by: pjkiger1 | January 27, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

This reverse-racism attitude, summed up in this post (above) is exactly what drove Obama's win in S.C.

"Congratulations to the first serious black presidential candidate! With more than 80% of Blacks behind you, you sure proved to South Carolinians and the rest of the USA that you are black enough!"

It ain't gonna work in many of the other states. It's very sad, but I think you could run a black Donald Duck and the black community would knee-jerk in unison with support.

Posted by: Splatter | January 27, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

The idea that Obama is not fit for office is a myth. He's smart enough that he was president of the Harvard Law Review -- the most prestigious position for law students around the country -- and has been described by Harvard professors as one of the brightest people to come through Harvard in the last few decades.

In Illinois, his signature legislation included the most sweeping ethics reform in many, many years, as well as criminal justice reforms that initially met stiff resistance but ended up passing easily, and an expansion of health care coverage -- all despite being in the minority.

Obama opposed the decision to invade Iraq and, under no obligation to do so as he planned a Senate run, publicly declared as much at a time when opposition to the war was deeply unpopular.

In the US Senate, he's passed ethics reform, helped secure loose Russian weapons, helped plan government response to a potential flu epidemic, and passed the "Google for government" bill.

If the measure of a candidate's readiness is their past record of success, I don't think there's any way you can argue that Obama isn't ready. I certainly challenge you to come up with a comparable list of concrete accomplishments made by Mrs. Clinton in her "35 years of service".

Look, experience is nice. But experience is a far worse predictor of success in the White House than is past success. So don't make experience a surrogate for competence, because it isn't.

And that's not even getting into the whole question of honesty and respect for democracy.

Posted by: davestickler | January 27, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Clinton/Duke '08
"White Power in the White House"

Posted by: alexkavez | January 27, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

we love you Obama in NYC!

Posted by: alexkavez | January 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

I knew somehting was strange these are the RON PAUL WACKO TYPES posting, over and over again acting like Obamas folks.

Posted by: p_peppermint | January 27, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

I never dreamed there would come a day when I didn't admire the Clintons, but the sleazy antics of the last couple of weeks have done it.

Posted by: wwmjn | January 27, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

The ENTIRE controversy over race was engineered and manufactured by the Obama campaign in order to fuel a win in South Carolina. Obama had seen the writing on the wall, namely that if he didn't win in South Carolina, a state whose Democratic Primary voters were composed of nearly 50% African Americans, he would be seen as nothing more than a boutique candidate on the order of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. He understandably realized that Hillary was garnering the majority of black support, despite the fact he himself was black, and felt if he was going to have ANY chance at being nominated, he had to win South Carolina. His staff then decided they were going to play the race card, and did so. They sent their surrogates out immediately following the New Hampshire primary, including Professor Michael Eric Dyson of Georgetown (a major advocate of the Obama campaign who speaks on Obama's behalf on every major political show on TV), who began questioning whether the win by Hillary in New Hampshire was NOT because she had swayed voters in that state based on their belief that she was a more experienced, more qualified, and more genuine candidate, but rather that they, the voters, had simply voted for her and not Obama because he was black. That same evening, Jesse Jackson, Jr. (a Senior Advisor to Obama's Campaign) went on MSNBC and made the following comment (and I'm paraphrasing here, but it's pretty accurate and you're welcome to google for the YouTube video that shows it) that Hillary's "tears" needed to be examined in light of the "Fact" (and fact is a complete falsehood on his part as he hasn't got a clue as to whether this is factual) that Hillary never cried about Katrina. He made this remark three times, and its clear intent was to say HILLARY CLINTON DOESN'T CARE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE.

This charge of RACISM, leveled at the New Hampshire voters who supported Hillary was a veiled attempt at painting ALL of Hillary Clinton's supporters (at least the white ones), in fact ALL Democrats who DIDN'T support Obama, as RACISTS. They then manufactured a controversy over Hillary's statement about MLK, which was ONLY made in response to OBAMA'S likening HIMSELF to MLK and JFK, claiming she had "DISSED" the man. Nothing could be further from the truth, but the media, nearly all of whom hate Hillary to the core, picked up on this in a heartbeat, and were defacto Obama surrogates in their effort to paint Hillary Clinton as, AT BEST, someone who wasn't sympathetic to blacks concerns or sensibilities.

The Obama campaign then went on to use Bill Clinton's words, where he OBVIOUSLY criticized Obama for his claim that he had been ADAMANTLY opposed to the Iraq War CONSISTENTLY TO THE SAME DEGREE, since before it started, and tried to paint those remarks as racist as well by misquoting Bill, twisting his words, and taking them completely out of context to suggest Bill Clinton had suggested Obama's ENTIRE campaign (and thereby the entire notion that a Black man could ever be president) was a "Fairy Tale". The TRUTH, though, is that Bill had said, CLEARLY AND CONCISELY, that Obama's claim that he had been consistent on his views about the war was a "Fairly Tale". Now, some could argue this is an unfair criticism of Obama, and that would have been a valid, if incorrect opinion in my view. However, they didn't do this. Instead, they clipped the speech by Bill to include NONE of the context of what he had said, and simply used the words "Give me a break, this whole thing is a Fairy Tale" as their quote from Bill, and then claimed he had said this in the context of saying Obama's entire campaign, his entire dream of becoming president, was a "Fairy Tale". This was done in order to anger blacks, to incite them to believe Bill Clinton was a closet racist. And it worked beautifully. Obama's lame claim that he had nothing to do with it was EASILY refuted by the MEMO that had been released by HIS CAMPAIGN which noted Bill's remarks, and did EXACTLY what I stated above in trying to claim Bill had made the claim Obama's campaign was a "Fairy Tale." Not to mention the remarks by Michelle Obama to that same effect at a mostly black event where she is quoted as having said, "That win in Iowa ain't no Fairy Tale" Another surrogate of Obama's, a representative of South Carolina named Bakari Sellers, went on to make the same claim the very MORNING of the Primary, although he was chastised about it by David Shuster.

The simple fact is, the Obama campaign started it all, and continued it non-stop. Every chance they got they tried to point the finger at the Clintons and say, "Hey, my opponents are race-baiting, people, isn't that despicable considering I'm a Black Man?" Anyone who watched the coverage over the past two weeks who didn't come away seeing that is simply blind. Blinded by either their own racial hatred, their ridiculous fantasies of a Utopia Obama would create, or their Repuglikkkunt-inspired and COMPLETELY baseless hatred of the Clintons.

Now, if you want to dismiss all this, you're welcome to. But it is completely and utterly factual. If you'd like links to all of the stuff, including the comments by Dyson, Jackson, and Michelle Obama, they're on YouTube. The Memo is at HuffingtonPost.com. Again, you can dismiss it, but you're simply lying to yourself. Obama, and his campaign, in a desperate bid to stay alive in this contest, PLAYED THE RACE CARD. And while it's garnered him a great deal more support among blacks, he's also realized he's lost a great deal of support among women, whites and Hispanics because of it.

It was bad enough that he pulled such a lowlife move. The fact he's lied about it continuously, and is now having his campaign, his surrogates, and his supporters spread these vicious, EVIL, and completely phony stories about voter intimidation on the part of Clinton supporters shows me there is NO depth to which he won't go. People claim Hillary acts as if she's owed this nomination. I say they're blind. Hillary has NEVER acted like that. The Media has painted that narrative for a year and she's thoroughly rejected it. OBAMA IS THE JERK WHO ACTS LIKE HE'S OWED THE PRESIDENCY. He acts, and his campaign acts, like any attack on him is an attack on blacks.

Now, I know that many blacks who are racist (and trust me, there are just as many racist blacks as there are whites proportionally), and many other blacks who aren't, but are no more interested in delving into the details of the campaigns as the majority of Americans, will be swayed by all of this nonsense that has been fueled by the Obama campaign and their defacto surrogates (the entire Hillary-Hating media). But they better remember one thing. WHITES MAKE UP THE MAJORITY OF THIS NATION, AND EVEN THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Obama may find he's won the battle (South Carolina), and lost the war.

I think it's too late for Obama, his surrogates, or advocates to close the Pandora's box they opened with their despicable lies and BS. There might be a chance, but I don't think there is. And frankly, I don't want there to be a chance anymore. For while I have been calling for a Hillary Clinton / Barack Obama ticket for the past two years, if Hillary were to put this man on the ticket I not only wouldn't be able to vote for her, but would in fact be forced out of principle to actively work against her campaign. To me, Barack Obama is a lying, lowlife, RACIST TRAITOR to everything this nation holds dear. The fact he's been able to convince so many morons otherwise doesn't surprise me though. Bush did the same for a while, and I was NEVER fooled by his lies and BS either. To me, Barack Obama is nothing more than a lowlife RACIST NIGG*R, not fit to shine my shoes, let alone be my president.

Posted by: hotnuke2007 | January 27, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama's spiritual adviser, J Wright gave Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness. Louis Farrakhan. maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For Americans, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road." His history is a rancid stew of lies. Any praise of Farrakhan heightens the prestige of the leader of the Nation of Islam. His anti-Semitism and particularly his false insistence that Jews have played an inordinate role in victimizing African Americans.
Farrakhan's dream has vilified whites and singled out Jews to blame for crimes large and small, either committed by others as well or not at all. (A dominant role in the slave trade, for instance.) He has talked of Jewish conspiracies to set a media line for the whole nation. He has reviled Jews in a manner that brings Hitler to mind. And yet Wright heaped praise on Farrakhan. According to Trumpet, he applauded his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation." He praised "his integrity and honesty." He called him "an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose." These are the words of a man who prayed with Obama just before the Illinois senator announced his run for the presidency. Will he pray with him just before his inaugural?
The New York Times recently reported on Obama's penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting "present" when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, "present" will not do.


Posted by: dyck21005 | January 27, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Its confirmed in SC, Obama is the black special-interest only candidate. SC only showed that Obama proved true to his racist church. Its was black voters ONLY that gave him the un-impressive win in SC. Michelle Obama has been stumping throwing our racial comments last few months but media refuses to report or print. That worked in a mostly black voter state (SC), wont work anywhere else, obamas have spent months chasing black voters from the Clintons and distanced himself from ALL white and Hispanics voters, again, showing he isn't too smart at making decisions and proven he doesn't have the ability to look ahead, but in his favor, no one said he was smart, just able to give a black inspirational speech that's written for him.. He is def not the uniter he and the media claimed. It was no surprise he won SC... Now let's move on to the not so racist primaries...Obama is an embarrassment to the U.S. His idea of change is going back to racial divisions of the 60's...He is a fairy tale in politics...Not experienced, no substance, now all he and Michele offer is skin color to the 1/3 of the American voters...BIG MISTAKE. More and more proof this guy couldn't lead his way of a paper bag...
Obama supporters wake up. Obama is running a racist campaign.

Obama's camp compared their victory over Clinton in Iowa to OJ's murder of his wife.

That was waaaaaay back in January. And the media covered it up!

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Posted by: dyck21005 | January 27, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure I would have booed Bill Clinton, but both Clintons' behavior this week certainly solidified my vote for Obama in New York...I was open to Hillary--I've gladly voted for her in the senate races, but she completely disappointed me this week. Her smugly patronizing comments about Obama as "frustrated" after the debate, her willingness to mislead on Reagan and Rezko. It all adds up to a politics that I want to get past.

The Bush Presidency has consistently reminded me of what I liked in the Clinton years; the Clinton campaign has reminded me of what I didn't like. I'm with Caroline Kennedy's Op-Ed today (sorry Post--I know it's in the Times), compelled by inspiration as leadership and calling people to service. He was right on Iraq and his policy ideas are not dramatically different from Hillary Clinton. In the end, it's tone and leadership that distinguish them. His approach is persuasive, indeed inspiring, and hers--theirs--is off putting.

Posted by: dcamtcon | January 27, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

Black poverty went from 33% to 22% under Clinton. Perhaps a slight bit of respect is in order. His comments haven't been that controversial. Jackson indeed drew most of his electoral success from Michigan and South Carolina where he won. MLK indeed worked with LBJ to pass important civil rights legislation.

Posted by: Astrolabe | January 27, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

It all started with Obama likening himself to historical figures. That's understandable because he cannot draw something substantive and concrete from his own experience. He should not take it as an attack if his qualities are scrutinized against the qualities of those figures he invokes. Obama and his camp initiated the race spectacle by over-reacting to and mis-characterizing Hillary for equalizing the credit among MLK, Johnson and Kennedy. They aggravated the tension by being candid in recognizing the positive in Reagan and the Republican ideas and being quick in faulting Bill Clinton and dismissive of Democratis' wisdom. Everything else is petty tit-for-tat aroused from those three main triggers. Never mind Obama's Punjab hit job on Clinton and similar attacks in the earlier months.

Obama has labelled Clinton's warning on terrorist threat and economic recession as "fear-mongering". Well, Bhutto has been assassinated and the US economy is falling. They have happened. It was not fear-mongering. What can be called fear-mongering is floating the mis-characterization that Clinton's negativity would spell defeat for the Democrats. It's baseless and her bipartisan performance in the Senate proves the contrary. It would be a mistake to succumb to Obama's fear-mongering. If America does not put an experienced agent of change in the Whitehouse, the same people who adore him now for his hyped rhetoric would be the same people devouring him with criticisms when he fails to deliver. All sentiments of hope can quickly turn into animosity just like what we've seen happen with Bush. As the cliché goes, "When hunger enters the door, love flies out of the window".

Obama cannot have it both ways - He cannot posture to be positive and then his rhetoric is negative. He mocks, he snipes, he spins, he mischaracterizes his rivals. Of course he can say they're doing it to him as well. But the difference is they did not make a pretentious "battle cry" out of "positive change" and did not posture themselves as "holier than thou". Obama did. That makes it a greater calling for him to mean what he says and to say what he means.

Posted by: readingbetweenlines | January 27, 2008 6:18 AM | Report abuse

Jojobickley,

Well said.

It's disheartening to see people run away from reason and claim to want change.

Posted by: ernita | January 27, 2008 4:48 AM | Report abuse

Tonight's coverage was one sided. CNN does not employ reporters. Reporters look for facts, not opinions. Will CNN act like the NYTimes did in selling the war? Will they sell us a candidate who lacks the experience to deliver the change the country needs?

Hillary is the only candidate with the experience, original ideas and insight to deliver the change. We have had a disaster with a guy whose only experience was failed businesses. How can democrats expect change from Barack? It seems naïve. The same naïveté that gave us a President fit enough to have a drink with.

Hillary, we need Bill to do what he does best - inspire us! We need you guys to guide us in the right change for America.

And we, the viewers/readers need to demand that media outlets stop the Hillary bashing and double standards.

The double standards that have been in play between Clinton and Obama need to be called out. The media have failed in our duty to expose them. Obama has benefited greatly from them, and they are unjust. How can it be that the press failed to see the double standard when Obama complained that he didn't know whether he was running against Hillary or Bill.

Imagine if Michelle were campaigning as effectively, as passionately, as Bill. Imagine Hillary complaining: 'I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes, Michelle or Barack.' It's laughable. It seems Obama is afforded a special privilege to whine.

The worst thing about Barack Obama's "Change" rhetoric is not that it is light on details. It is that it is a preposterous contradiction: while he claims to be fighting the status quo, it is he who embodies it. It isn't Hillary Clinton who made racist and sexist remarks and got away with it. Why did he get away with it? Because it's the status quo.

Barack Obama will be humbled. But the most worrying thing is that, if he wins the nomination and general election, he may be humbled the same way George W. Bush has been: at the cost of the entire country. I'd rather he gain humility on his own time and not on our dime.

Posted by: jojobickley | January 27, 2008 4:42 AM | Report abuse

Tonight's coverage was one sided. CNN does not employ reporters. Reporters look for facts, not opinions. Will CNN act like the NYTimes did in selling the war? Will they sell us a candidate who lacks the experience to deliver the change the country needs?

Hillary is the only candidate with the experience, original ideas and insight to deliver the change. We have had a disaster with a guy whose only experience was failed businesses. How can democrats expect change from Barack? It seems naïve. The same naïveté that gave us a President fit enough to have a drink with.

Hillary, we need Bill to do what he does best - inspire us! We need you guys to guide us in the right change for America.

And we, the viewers/readers need to demand that media outlets stop the Hillary bashing and double standards.

The double standards that have been in play between Clinton and Obama need to be called out. The media have failed in our duty to expose them. Obama has benefited greatly from them, and they are unjust. How can it be that the press failed to see the double standard when Obama complained that he didn't know whether he was running against Hillary or Bill.

Imagine if Michelle were campaigning as effectively, as passionately, as Bill. Imagine Hillary complaining: 'I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes, Michelle or Barack.' It's laughable. It seems Obama is afforded a special privilege to whine.

The worst thing about Barack Obama's "Change" rhetoric is not that it is light on details. It is that it is a preposterous contradiction: while he claims to be fighting the status quo, it is he who embodies it. It isn't Hillary Clinton who made racist and sexist remarks and got away with it. Why did he get away with it? Because it's the status quo.

Barack Obama will be humbled. But the most worrying thing is that, if he wins the nomination and general election, he may be humbled the same way George W. Bush has been: at the cost of the entire country. I'd rather he gain humility on his own time and not on our dime.

Posted by: jojobickley | January 27, 2008 4:31 AM | Report abuse

Tonight's coverage was one sided. CNN does not employ reporters. Reporters look for facts, not opinions. Will CNN act like the NYTimes did in selling the war? Will they sell us a candidate who lacks the experience to deliver the change the country needs?

Hillary is the only candidate with the experience, original ideas and insight to deliver the change. We have had a disaster with a guy whose only experience was failed businesses. How can democrats expect change from Barack? It seems naïve. The same naïveté that gave us a President fit enough to have a drink with.

Hillary, we need Bill to do what he does best - inspire us! We need you guys to guide us in the right change for America.

And we, the viewers/readers need to demand that media outlets stop the Hillary bashing and double standards.

The double standards that have been in play between Clinton and Obama need to be called out. The media have failed in our duty to expose them. Obama has benefited greatly from them, and they are unjust. How can it be that the press failed to see the double standard when Obama complained that he didn't know whether he was running against Hillary or Bill.

Imagine if Michelle were campaigning as effectively, as passionately, as Bill. Imagine Hillary complaining: 'I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes, Michelle or Barack.' It's laughable. It seems Obama is afforded a special privilege to whine.

The worst thing about Barack Obama's "Change" rhetoric is not that it is light on details. It is that it is a preposterous contradiction: while he claims to be fighting the status quo, it is he who embodies it. It isn't Hillary Clinton who made racist and sexist remarks and got away with it. Why did he get away with it? Because it's the status quo.

Barack Obama will be humbled. But the most worrying thing is that, if he wins the nomination and general election, he may be humbled the same way George W. Bush has been: at the cost of the entire country. I'd rather he gain humility on his own time and not on our dime.

Posted by: jojobickley | January 27, 2008 4:31 AM | Report abuse

I honestly don't believe hotnuke is a Clinton supporter. I think he's an extreme right winger trying to make the Clinton's look bad, something that these days doesn't need doing.

Anyhoo, to Obama. HOORRAAYYYYY! I was so worried about this country and a return to "triangulation" of the 90s.

The last two weeks showed that if you're willing to say anything to become elected, that says more about your character than anything else.

Also, using an ex-president as a partisan hack was about the dumbest thing that could have been tried. Ex-presidents are supposed to be, ahem, presidential.

I know it's his wife, and I know it's hard to keep his mouth shut (I used to love Bill), but he really, really blew it for her.

I wish Obama was more explicit about bringing about a truly progressive revolution. But I think he's trying to lay the ground work.

I was an Edwards supporter, but I'm also a pragmatist. Obmama can win. Hillary is literally the republicans only chance, and after the last 7 years they don't deserve one.

Posted by: dmblum | January 27, 2008 4:14 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons are clearly a despicable pair of sleazy, power hungry individuals. I, too, am sorry that I voted for Bill two times. Mr. Obama is truly a class act and he gets the vote of my entire family.

Posted by: pjgingers | January 27, 2008 3:11 AM | Report abuse

hotnuke just spent too much time in front of the microwave. Pity. And scary. Is there a moderator on these boards? I'm seeing his same hateful comments on every blog here. Really sad when you want to have a political discussion with rational people and the hotnukes muck it up with their psychotic diatribes.

On-topic: Great win for Mr. Obama and shame on Billary for the constant poo-slinging of members of THEIR OWN PARTY. They claim to be victimized by the right-wing conspiracy but when the chips fall they have no problem adopting the same Rovian tactics for their own personal gain. If HRC wins, we lose, because it'll be four more years of polarizing politics. Isn't everyone sick of the same-old, same-old?

I will take Obama's "inexperience" (although he still has twelve years of elected office to Hill's eight) and "naievete" (unity is only naive if you don't believe in it) over Billary's "experience" in corrupt campaigning and outright lies, any day.

Posted by: tinroofrusted77 | January 27, 2008 2:59 AM | Report abuse

May this video of Bill Clinton live on forever in infamy! If anybody had any doubt about who will say anything to win, just watch.

Consider also: Bill wasn't prompted with any mention of Jesse Jackson. Why didn't he, for example, compare Obama's victory to Edwards in 04?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqd2dfjl2pw

Posted by: kripkenstein | January 27, 2008 2:54 AM | Report abuse

Hi there, WaPo? Do you record IP addresses?

I haven't had a chance to read the posting guidelines, but -- someone has been pointed this out already -- at least one Clinton fan has been issuing death threats.


Posted by: boatapple | January 27, 2008 1:26 AM | Report abuse

For HotNuke2007, you sound as whiney and shrill as Hillary. What I remember most about the Clintons is the disgrace,the utter embarrassment and terrible shame they brought to the office of the President. Rabid Clintonites like you also want to forget the horrific failure to act against genocide in Rwanda,the economic destruction of NAFTA and the corporate capitulation of the 1996 Telecommunication Act that opened the door to media consolidation that created the fascist propaganda machine of the Bush Administration. Another Clinton running this country while Bill shags the help in the Lincoln bedroom is NOT what we need to save our democracy. You're as bad as the Republicans with their offensive Reagan idolatry.

Posted by: djcrow22 | January 27, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

Some of you people might want to consider the following before

18 U.S.C. 879
a) Whoever knowingly and willfully threatens to kill, kidnap, or inflict bodily harm upon--
* * *
(3) a major candidate for the office of President or Vice President, or a member of the immediate family of such candidate; or
(4) a person protected by the Secret Service under section 3056 (a)(6);
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

Got that? Five years. In federal ass-pounding prison.

Posted by: srobinson2 | January 27, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

I'm a Ron Paul supporter, but I am grateful that Obama beat Hillary today. I've watched Obama on C-Span, listened to his podcasts, and read his recent book. The man impresses me. If Ron Paul doesn't run third party, I will end up voting for Obama. Congrats Obama.

Posted by: uniteunderthecross | January 27, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Wow, Hillary supporters like fusionpower, seegreen, and hotnuke make the most honest case for their candidate possible. If you find their rhetoric and arguments and persuasive, by all means, be my guest.

Posted by: elroy1 | January 26, 2008 11:46 PM | Report abuse

Congratulations to the first serious black presidential candidate!

With more than 80% of Blacks behind you, you sure proved to South Carolinians and the rest of the USA that you are black enough!

Posted by: fjstratford | January 26, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

Fascinating numbers from MSNBC.

56% of South Carolinians felt that Hillary & Bill Clinton had been unfairly attacked by the other campaign.

50% of South Carolinians felt that BOTH camps had engaged in dirty campaigning and were disgusted by both campaigns.

Somebody tell Barak that his supporters BOO'ing the former President that Hispanics admire won't get him much sympathy in that demographic.

And he won't win nationally without bringing the Hispanics into his voting block.

Posted by: auntmo9990 | January 26, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

No Dave20707, this was PURELY the result of the RACIST SCHEMING AND ACCUSATIONS BY THE OBAMA CAMP THAT WERE CONTINUOUSLY REPEATED BY THE HILLARY-HATING MEDIA, BY HIS LYING, LOWLIFE RACIST SURROGATES AND SUPPORTERS, AND OF COURSE BY YOU.

You are a despicable, lying, TREASONOUS, RACIST PIECE OF SH*T. Obama supporters are simply lucky they're not in front of me spouting all their lies, or their would be some people in a fukking morgue tonight.

Posted by: hotnuke2007 | January 26, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

Blacks unwilling to support a white candidate?! HRC was up in South Carolina by 20 points a few weeks ago and pulling strong in the black community. Billary brought this on themselves.

Posted by: Dave20707 | January 26, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

I am stunned by those who still harbor a soft spot for the Clintons after all they have done and said in this campaign. As a seventy year old white male I am happy to include myself in the Obama camp, glad to be given hope by a candidate who does not want to take us back to live through the White House psychodramas that the Clintons inflicted on us in the nineties and who promises to lift us up from the pit of despair and shame into which George W. Bush has dumped this country in the past eight years.

Posted by: psplus | January 26, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

The Jesse Jackson comment is really shocking. I already lost a lot of respect for the Clintons over the last few days, but I didn't expect them to go back to the well with anything that totally transparent. The Clintons really, truly have no decency.

Posted by: davestickler | January 26, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

America lost something today. It has been losing it slowly for decades, but today marked its COMPLETE and UTTER disappearance. What is it that America lost? Its ability to recognize the truth.

America has finally been overrun by the lies of the Right-Wing controlled media. They've finally bought into the lies, hate, fear and divisiveness these scum have been selling.

At least it appears that way. Perhaps it's only an anomoly of South Carolina. Here's hoping it is. Here's hoping that the EVIL, VICIOUS, DESPICABLE LIES told by the Obama campaign about the Clintons, and repeated ad nauseum by their defacto surrogates in the Right-Wing media like Joe Scarborough, constantly saying over and over every day that the Clintons had injected race into this election, when they knew it was Obama who had, will not hold sway over the rest of America.

We will find out February 5th. And if the LYING, LOWLIFE, RACIST PIECE OF SHIITE NAMED BARACK OBAMA is successful that day, then America is doomed. For it will mean none of our votes really matter. It will mean we've truly become a corporate fascist state, controlled completely by a bunch of Right-Wing, Neo-Fascist scum in the media and their corporate controllers, bent on twisting reality to fit their needs at the cost of all Americans. And truthfully, it'll be a day I really will begin planning on leaving this country.

Posted by: hotnuke2007 | January 26, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

I am very disappointed in Black Americans' unwillingness to support a white person. Instead of bringing the country together, Obama's compaign is tearing the party and the country apart.

Posted by: seegreen2002 | January 26, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

The Clintons have disappointed me. I've seen few things as disturbing in a campaign as the race-baiting that has come from the Clinton camp. They think they'll win the Latino vote by using racial code words. They're in for a surprise - Latinos will see through this troubling strategy. They'll vote for the candidate that is best for this country and the candidate that is most likely to bring change to a broken system. That is Senator Obama.

E Pluribus Unum. Out of Many, We are One.

Posted by: maq1 | January 26, 2008 10:14 PM | Report abuse

I can not believe any of this!

I am a YOUNG (29), Educated (Ph.D.), and Progressive voter.

I will NEVER vote for Obama -- he is a Conservative Republican in Democrat's clothing. Hillary is a moderate to liberal Republican in the same Democrat's clothing.

There are only two Democrats left, and neither of which has much of a chance, Edwards and Kucinich.

Some of us are HOPING for another DNC turnaround, where a real Democrat, who will definitely win, can be selected...none other than the former VP AL GORE!!!

We need a person who favors Universal Health Care (Clinton and Edwards at least do this, Obama does not even go this far).

We need someone who supports increasing the gasoline price severely, or more, to combat global warming...this is a stance none of the people have taken, but at least Edwards and Clinton have talked about the need for this. Here is where Gore shines.

etc. etc. etc.

All I see is that Obama and Clinton both keep supporting the war. Why do they not oppose further funding? At least Clinton is a little better on the other issues, and knows that the Republicans can not be worked with. Really, didn't people try working with Hitler and Imperial Japan? Look where this got these people?

Posted by: fusionpower | January 26, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Is this Bill's macaca moment?

Posted by: holybuzz | January 26, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Jesse Jackson has always wanted to be relevant in a campaign for president. Well, tonight he might get his wish, albeit not in a way he would have expected or hoped for. If Bill Clinton's dismissive, near-racist remark gets the kind of play it should (if some media outlets that have already come out for Hillary don't squelch it or attempt to rationalize it--I'm lookin' at you, NYT!), not even Mr. "Is is" will be able to wiggle out of it. Shame on you, Bubba.

Lest anyone not quite get the indignation and disgust being expressed here, here's the shorthand of what Bill said: "Obama won, sure, but any black man with a gift for gab can win in THIS crazyass state's Dem primary."

That's it, pure and simple and unguarded and angry and blurted and, hopefully, a death blow to his wife's campaign.

Posted by: holybuzz | January 26, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

I agree with everyone thus far - I was torn after New Hampshire, perhaps responding to a more humble Hillary Clinton, but in the past 2 weeks, I am convinced that the only way dems will beat John McCain is with Barack Obama. Hillary can't beat McCain on the experience "brand" and I am sickened by the Clinton's behavior in the past two weeks. We need a new voice and a new style of leadership in America. No more negative politics!

Posted by: bethechange1 | January 26, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

The booing of Slick Willie means there is a backlash fomenting against the Rovian/Clintonian/Atwatereque wedge politics. Let Hill/Bill continue this folly if they want. They WILL destroy any hope for the DNC to take the White House. Alienation is an ugly thing and the majordomos and poobahs of the DNC will have its titular head and his wife (in name only) to blame.

Posted by: meldupree | January 26, 2008 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Congratulations to the people of S. Carolina for seeing thru the dishonest Clinton radio ads and email campaigns (Obama likes Reagan... Obama is a secret Muslim). After eight years of Bush, the American people have had enough of being lied to.

As a paid-up member of the White Males for Obama club, I echo the comments above, but let's remember, the Clintons are the ones who want to inject race into this, and imply that Obama isn't ready (read: Obama is uppity). It's in Obama's interest not to let this become about race. He's proved again he can win on his merits .... 55-26 !!! No way is that just black voters.

Lesson for Hillary: you can't cry your way to the White House, and you can't lie your way either !

Posted by: tomscanlon | January 26, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

So you've finally seen Clinton's true colors? Shouldn't you doubt your ability to judge character, even Obama's, since you've obviously been clueless about Clinton's for 16 years?!

Posted by: usafchap06 | January 26, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately, this past president's behavior has been so far from "presidential" that I feel like booing him, too. After years of climbing out of the hole he made of his personal life, he topped it off by showing his "true" self in this campaign. I'm ashamed of ever having voted for him. I could not/shall not vote for his wife.

Posted by: jmccowan | January 26, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Another white dude echoing elronyo and Ulricil. I'm going for Obama, but I respect your votes for Edwards.

Here's the latest crap from Bill Clinton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqd2dfjl2pw

Posted by: shungry | January 26, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

This is Justice! I have been sickened by the lies of the "evil twins"and their sadistic glee as they have tortured Obama with their Roveian tactics. They tried to show "the boy" that he had not earned his place at the plantation dining room. Hurrah for America! Maybe there is a God!

Posted by: skycontrol | January 26, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

I'm with greener_pastures. I live in California and will vote for Edwards on Super Tuesday--and vote for Obama if he pulls out prior to that date. Once more: STOP THE RACE-BAITING, CLINTON. WE AREN'T THAT STUPID. (For the record: white guy here.)

Posted by: Ulricii | January 26, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

And why wouldn't that crowd in S.C. boo Bill Clinton? His behavior was inexusable.... Here is another college-educated white male who will not support Hillary. I would will vote for Edwards on February 5th here in Illinois. If he were to pull out before then for some reason, I would vote for Obama. Stop the race-baiting, Clintons. We aren't that stupid....

Posted by: greener_pastures | January 26, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

Dr. King would be proud of Senator Obama, and of the good people of South Carolina today.

Posted by: sherirogers | January 26, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company