At this point I’d really like to dial back my criticism of the Clinton campaign and start focusing on the general election and the senate and house races. Really. I would. But it’s not possible to do that because the Clinton campaign continues to commit what, from a Democrat, can only be described as atrocities. Their latest offense against decency involves forwarding a picture of Barack Obama wearing traditional Somali garb to Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report. Obama wore the clothing during a trip to his father’s native Kenya in 2006.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of “shameful offensive fear-mongering” by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.
Plouffe was reacting to a banner headline on the Drudge Report saying that aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) had e-mailed a photo calling attention to the African roots of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
“The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat front-runner dressed as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya,” the Drudge Report said.
Somalia, for those that don’t know, is a predominantly Islamic country.
“Wouldn’t we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?” questioned one campaign staffer, in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.
Why, exactly, would we be seeing such a picture on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC? Would it suggest that she was secretly a Muslim and therefore, presumably, sympathetic to al-Qaeda? The Clinton campaign doesn’t deny sending the picture around. Instead, they make an excuse the undermines their rationale for sending it around.
This is from Clinton’s new campaign manager, Maggie Williams:
Enough.
If Barack Obama’s campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely.
This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry.
We will not be distracted.
Stuff like this makes me feel sorry for my comrades that are supporting Hillary’s campaign. There is no defense for their actions here. They are transparently using Bill Kristol’s politics of fear. And, this originates with the staff and is defended by the campaign manager. Maggie Williams neither denies that the photo was sent around by the campaign, nor apologizes for it. Instead, she disingenuously suggests that there is nothing divisive about the photograph.
This isn’t even dog-whistle politics. This is straight up playing directly to Obama’s heritage to invoke fear and white backlash. This is a 100% Republican tactic. Yes, we should expect to see lots of this stuff in the summer and fall, coming from Republicans. They will try to paint Obama as a Muslim, a terrorist sympathizer, and a less than authentically patriotic American.
The Clintonites, if pressed, would probably argue that they are only testing Obama and he’ll be stronger for it for having weathered it in the primaries. That may be true for Obama, but the Clintons’ motives are purely self-serving.
Plouffe said in a statement: “On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world,” said Plouffe.
It’s the Clintons’ decision to campaign this way that led to my decision not to vote for them in November, or for any office for anything ever again. It violates my personal ethical standards. It is campaigning like this that made me hate Jesse Helms and Trent Lott. I don’t mind political differences…you’re conservative, I’m liberal…let’s try to get along. It’s race-baiting, religious bigotry, and fear-mongering that make me do more than oppose Republicans politically. You don’t get a pass because you have a ‘D’ at the end of your name. Not from me. And, hopefully, not from any progressives.
But, as you can see, this actually is just me showing my prejudice against ovaries.
They wouldn’t be circulating the photo if they didn’t think it would hurt Obama. There is no other plausible reason for circulating any information about your opponent. For them to deny this is an insult to the intelligence of anyone unfortunate enough to hear them speak.
That only leaves open the question of why they think it will hurt Obama. There are many possible answers here, and none of them are flattering to the Clinton campaign. I can only imagine that they figure they’ve irretrievably lost the black vote, so they’re trying to compensate by attracting white bigots.
Nice. The Clinton knack for spectacular, distasteful self-destruction is apparently not exclusive to Bill.
Yeah, if they win the primary this way, do they still expect African-Americans to vote for them like sheep?
here’s a big part of the reason…she’s losing ground every day.
her lead in ohio continues to shrink: from a high of 55%-34% on feb 14, it’s now 51%-40% in a quinnipiac poll, and 47%-39% according to a university of cincinnati poll.
an interesting aside, according to the u.c. poll, edwards is still polling at 9%, kucinich at 2%…imo, it’s not likely that hillary is going to capture the majority of those votes.
l see a trend here, and other than the core female supporters, people are coming more and more to recognize her, and the campaign, for what it really is and what it represents, and they don’t like it.
Shouldn’t we applaud politeness and respect to host countries shown by wearing their native costume? Eating the native foods?
Having lived in Ohio during the 60’s and been all too close to the Cleveland riots of that decade, I believe this sort of thing might play well now, especially given the dismal state of the economy. Just when we think we might be rising above it. And from our own side. Very hard to deal with.
In that Drudge link he shows photos of Hillary, Chelsea, Bill and Bush in local robes.
Thanks. I’ll take a look. I’ve only seen the one photo of Obama.
I’m surprised they didn’t alter the photo to depict Obama wearing a bone through his nose.
Obama should counter with commercial of him and Eddie Murphy him wearing the traditional garb and making fun of the whole thing (a la Coming to America).
But really. This is less about a “dirty trick” than Exhibit A about the Clintons living in the past. I mean c’mon, are average Americans really upset about seeing their future president wearing African clothes? Maybe Hillary is trying to triangulate and get votes from Nixon. Or maybe she’s going after the Reagan Democrats. In any case it’s just plain dumb and counterproductive. Or maybe this is just a sampling of what Hillary supporters have been threatening the Republicans would throw at Obama, you know, the ultimate smear merchants getting ready to hit Obama upside the head.
Well, if this is all they got then bring it on.
Consider that Hillary has not been averse to using these guys –From Rupert Murdoch to David Brooks to Matt Drudge, her campaign courted them with every instrument at its disposal, including targeted leaks and Bill Clinton’s legendary personal charm.
Hey, be prepared – the dirt is dug, being thrown. Hillary has gone negative. Kinda coincidental all the shit hitting the media today. Hmmmm. I’m cynical after reading another hit piece.
Obama’s mother, a professor of anthropology who was a communist sympathizer despised America. Ditto his wife Michelle. His father converted to Catholicism back to Islam. This BS appears in a Spengler piece, ATimes.
won’t link to this sh**t. Don’t worry, the GOP will use it
How much damage can she do before she quite?
Who will bell this cat? asks Robert Novak
Like the change you made from Hillary to cat. The image is much more effective.
I know why Obama is calling it the silly season, but for me it’s become the dreadful season.
The campaign statement is daring him to play tit for tat when it says that Hillary wore the garb of countries she visited…
Now, if he could just get a colorful contingency of Somalis arm and arm with some Native Indians to dance up on his stage, the mockery would give him a great blowback on her campaign. After all, his campaign is all about uniting, this is a great opportunity to contrast his policy of inviting wide array of peoples vs her pinched policy of shutting people out until they first drop to their knees.
Fingers crossed he’ll stay with his non tit for tat rebuttals.
My people have a word for that approach. We call it “maturity”.
I’m a long way from enthusiastic about Barack Obama, but I do really appreciate and respect the way he has thus far behaved like an adult. I hope it catches on. Our government could use some adults for a change.
Where’s map106 when you need ’em? I want to hear the defense for this from a Hillary backer. I know I won’t find it at that other unmentioned blog site.
he/she is a McCain supporter now.
The boran2 boy attended the birthday party of a Japanese friend at which all participants were photographed wearing a kimono with the honoree. I suppose that we’ll have to hide that shot in case he runs for president and seeks the support of those with long memories.
I’m confused.
Are you saying that you are secretly Japanese?
Or are you saying that the Japanese are secretly terrorist sympathizing Muslims?
Umm, I’ll go with the first choice though Pearl Harbor was more what I originally had in mind.
What’s wrong with this headline?
Ugh.
Clinton Fury….dear lady is that with a s’ or a ‘s ?
In her case it’s a good idea to be careful what you ‘fury’ for.
This is actually good news. I’ve been having ongoing policy level discussions about Clinton vs. Obama with my husband, who has done social work and is heavily committed to universal (albeit single payer) health care. He’s been holding on to Clinton support for a long time.
No more; the woman has sunken below low in the last 48 hours. If she can’t organize and discipline a campaign staff, she can’t manage an administration…
And by the way, wasn’t that one of the criticisms of the previous 8 Clinton years? Call her Senate office. Let them know you’ll be contributing to anyone who challenges her in the next primary. That’s the only threat that might work right now.
.
The original story covered by Africa News and Obama’s own website.
Djibouti (HAN) September 1, 2006 – Sen. Barack Obama, visited a sprawling tent camp in eastern Ethiopia for people displaced by devastating floods earlier this month, saying the U.S. military will continue to help the region.
U.S. Navy personnel began relief operations two weeks ago in the eastern town of Dire Dawa, where the first flash floods ripped through the town on Aug. 6. In eastern, southern and northeastern Ethiopia, flooding caused by the heavy rains has killed more than 600 people and displaced tens of thousands of people, according to U.N. officials.
“The next order of business is to make sure these families are taken care of,” said Obama, who is on a five-country tour of Africa. “But this shows what kind of role the U.S. military can play.”
U.S. naval engineers, who are part of the anti-terror Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa based in neighboring Djibouti, set up 60 enormous canvas tents that are housing 2,700 people. The tents are furnished with straw mats and basic necessities.
≈ Cross-posted from Renee in Ohio’s diary — You wanna rumble, Hillary? ≈
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I suppose one could call that a two fer. His answer takes the opportunity of demonstrating his hands on work to show the honorable work our honorable military can accomplish when given the right task, all the while bringing aid and attention to a foreign country suffering from a natural catastrophe.
Thanks for giving him the opportunity Hillary/Drudge.
Responses like this make me realize that “this ain’t your grandpa’s Democrat”
And the same unflappable response and disgusted wave of the hand is apparently in store for the Hillary crowd’s “observations” as well. He’s not falling for this shit.
That is a great response by Obama. Democrats need to finally take on the Republican smear that they aren’t patriotic and are soft on “terror”. Running away and pretending to be tough doesn’t cut it. The democrats must defend themselves against charges like this.
I don’t see any evidence in the links that the Clinton campaign is circulating the photo, other than Drudge, who is as credible as the Magic 8Ball. Though I’ll admit their response is strange and evasive. Is there evidence besides Drudge that they are the ones promoting the photo, and who exactly is responsible?
In any case, I don’t see it being harmful to Obama. It’s his friends that are looking to me like the real problem. Farrakhan’s endorsement, for example. I have a certain sympathy for Farrakhan, but his attempt to ride the Obama bandwagon can only do damage. There’s no reason to think Farrakhan and others like him really care whether Obama wins. In fact they may find it more comfortable to keep the status quo, so there’s no motivation for them to really help and STFU. Obama has done a brilliant job of seeking to be the president for all Americans, not just the Black President or the agent of militants. His enemies can’t undo that achievement. Only his commensals can.
Comedy. I’d say her criminal donor friends can be more closely linked to her than Farrakhan. All you’ve got is Calypso Louis saying something nice. HRC has criminals getting her money.
As far as the response it would have been easy to deny it. They did not.
look at Hillary’s statement here. If you are being accused of forwarding a photo to Drudge then it would make sense that you would deny sending such photos. Her silence says everything that needs saying on that matter.
Yes, an apparent denial that don’t deny the substance of the charge should raise a red flag. There have been many recent examples of deceptive language, which are used to create the appearance of an accusation or denial.
McCain’s comment, as I recall, that “[he] did not betray the public’s trust,” fails to refute the charge. A Clinton surrogate’s misdirection about who was promoting the plagiarism charge, in which she deflected blame to a television station, conspicuously avoiding the question she was asked — are you promoting this charge? And Howard Wolfson’s use of a hypothetical — “When an author plagiarizes from another author. ..” — blatantly elides past the point that a speech is not a book, in an obvious attempt to suggest plagiarism rather than make it as a charge. Wolfson’s hypothetical is the tell. And lawyerly types frequently use this technique, under the specious logic that it is technically true, even though it still qualifies as deceptive.
What part of “We’re going to get Our Girl into the White House whether you like it or not” did you not understand, Boo?
I’ve now officially lost all respect for 40-45% of the Democratic Party. Anyone who would vote for Clinton in this contest is no less scum than she is.
is almost making me feel sympathetic toward her husband. I said “almost”.
If we use Hillary’s rationale anyone who celebrates Kwanza is not American. Clinton campaign..”smells like desperation..”
Please please please oh FSM make the bad people stop.
HRC changed campaign managers.
Yes. To the one who was called to testify about taken papers out of Vince Foster’s office. I have no idea what, if anything, came of that.
soon the clinton’s will be noting that president coolidge secretly worshipped the great spirit.
Nor should the Clinton camp get a pass because they sent out a black woman (Williams) to defend this tactic.
I notice that she waited until after the SOBU before she went all Karl Rove on Obama. Well I guess that’s not really true, she’s been at this for some time, that’s why she had to apologize. Guess she’ll have to apologize again next year.
And how do you know that this was SENT OUT by the Clinton campaign? Because Drudge said so?? Is that it?? You have a very low threshold for evidence here.
The National Examiner ran this photo in their Feb. 4th edition magazine. Drudge said he “OBTAINED” an email from a Clinton staffer. He DID NOT say he “RECEIVED” an email from a Clinton staffer. I know when I get an email, I receive it. I don’t obtain it. This suggests that he got it in a rather roundabout way, no???
So he “OBTAINED” and email where one staffer was commenting to another “Wouldn’t we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?”
I can easily imagine one staffer complaining to another about the unfair press coverage she has received. Doesn’t mean they were pushing this story externaly. In fact, Drudge’s choice of words indicates that this did not happen.
I agree. I still don’t see any evidence except the word of one serial liar. If the Clinton campaign had just denied it, that should have been the end of it. But they didn’t, which is very troubling. Maybe I’m still hopelessly naive, but it’s hard for me to see the Clinton machine doing something so childish and self-defeating. Unless they come up with a convincing response, though, at the least this raises concern about something that I’d never have foreseen: the basic competence of her campaign staff, and where that might leave us in November.
What’s to deny? That a staffer sent a note to another staffer that said something to the effect that Hillary wouldn’t have received the kind of threatment in the media that Obama has received?
I’m honestly surprised her campaign staff doesn’t have anything better to do than send photos of Obama from 2006 to each other. Don’t they have an election or two (or 11) they need to win?
Drudge’s claim (or implication) that the photo was circulated to the press, or at least him, by the Clinton campaign. Shouldn’t be that hard to explain, but all I’ve seen is an attempt to misdirect.
By using the word “obtained” rather than “received” regarding the email, it shows that he did not get the story pushed to him by a Clinton staffer. How he came upon it, we don’t know, but it was not by the Clinton campaign shopping the story around.
So why don’t they just say that? That’s all they had to do. Either they’re hiding something or they’re shockingly incompetent, seems to me. Do you have a better theory?
That said, I still object to the blogs and left media picking this up as if it’s verified by someone other than a known serial liar.
honestly, i don’t see the “obtained” vs. “received” distinction you’re making here. the words are pretty much synonymous in this context.
“obtained” is just a fancy way of saying “got”. if the report said they “got” the photos from the clinton campaign, it still means that the clinton campaign is responsible. that’s true whether the verb is “got from”, “obtained from” or “received from”. all three indicate that it came from the clinton campaign.
that being said, it is true that drudge is completely unreliable. really the only damning thing is that the clinton administration didn’t deny they sent it.
Really???
How many emails have you obtained in your life? I get them all the time in my INBOX, but I don’t obtain them there.
Booman —
Why would circulating this benefit Clinton in a Democratic primary? Whose votes would the Clinton campaign be trying to win with this? Are there really a lot of voters in the Democratic base who are likely to respond to racist and xenophobic appeals like this? Would it ever make sense to court them in a way sure to alienate the vast majority of Democrats? The answer to both questions is a resounding NO.
The same lack of logic applied to the Obama camp’s claim that the Clintons used “racist” tactics in South Carolina — when, given the make up of the Democratic electorate in that state, playing racial poliitics would be guaranteed to hurt them with the vast majority of primary voters — whites as well as African Americans.
Who are the bigots? Who is indulging in ugly prejudice? In my view it is the Obama supporters who constantly argue that this sort of thing will win votes among working class Democrats because those supporters believe that the working class is, naturally, of course, without a doubt, racist and xenophobic.
Your class prejudices are showing.
To raise Obama’s negatives among Republicans, Independents, and Democrats with confederate flags on the back of their pickups, giving her an edge on the electability argument in the Democratic primary. At least that’s what they seem to be hoping for.
Scorched Earth is the other possibility, although I can’t see her trying this again in 2012.
And if you really don’t understand the racist nature of the Clintons’ campaign after New Hampshire – stupid though it was – then it would be abundantly clear to me that interaction with you would be a total waste of my time.
Raising your opponent’s negatives is a standard campaign strategy, and Obama’s low negatives make this strategy even more imperative for the Clinton campaign. Negative campaigning can be effective, although it’s primarily effective at closing the gap between a challenger and the frontrunner (or incumbent).
We agree that it’s unwise strategy in many ways, because, for instance, it can backfire and raise the attacker’s negatives, too. But when a campaign sees itself in serious trouble, it’s pretty much the only way to make up ground.
I’m not sure if I should treat your post seriously, esmense. The reason the Clinton campaign would engage in these types of tactics is extremely obvious — to win. The argument that the Clinton campaign wouldn’t engage in these type of tactics because it would be unwise would also seem cover much of their strategy. The results of their strategy clearly weren’t what they wanted, but they were willing to use these tactics in order to win — in spite of the risks.
It would have been helpful to them if they hadn’t exercised such poor judgment in running their campaign. It’s also clear that they were hurt by their missteps, and this is a very good reason for why they shouldn’t have engaged in this type of strategy.
Since when did Drudge carry water for the Clintons?
And what does this have to do with other principals in Mark Penn’s consulting firm?
Young minds want to know.
Obviously, we need people to search for pictures of candidates visiting overseas. You know, pix of someone lifting a mug at an Octoberfest surrounded by guys in leiderhosen so we can pin WWII on them.
Who is indulging in ugly prejudice? In my view it is the Obama supporters who constantly argue that this sort of thing will win votes among working class Democrats because those supporters believe that the working class is, naturally, of course, without a doubt, racist and xenophobic.
Esmense,
Nobody mentioned Democrats being bigots except you.
Pick up a mirror.
I saw one pic on SFGate that showed Obama in a red shirt and khakis with what amounted to a sarong areound his waist. Hardly what I would call “traditional African ceremonial garb”. What a ridiculous blow up over something which was really innocuous. While I don’t believe racism is dead, I can’t imagine anyone seeing this photo and saying in all seriousness that Obama is secretly anti-American.