A big chunk of sunday's talking head time was taken up by the controversial comments Hillary Clinton made earlier in a USA Today interview.
When she said "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me", many people thought she (unintentionally) slurred non-white Americans.
Did she and her team get the chance to set the record straight ??? Big time. Terry McAuliffe on Meet the press, Howard Wolfsson on Fox and probably on a lot of other shows I didn't see.
Did they take the chance. Of course not, just like with the Bosnia flare-up it looks allmost impossible for the Clinton team to admit to a mistake. They still stick to the lame excuse that Hillary was simply quoting an AP story.
So, who did explain that it was simply a bad choice of words and absolutely not an intentional playing of the race card. You've guessed it. David Axelrod.
Terry McAullife on Meet the Press :
"MR. RUSSERT: ...she's saying that white Americans are hardworking Americans. A lot of African-Americans took great offense at that.
MR. McAULIFFE: Yeah. Well, and that's not what she meant. And she was quoting the AP story and could--literally, nobody has worked harder, as you know, than President Clinton...
MR. RUSSERT: Well, the AP story did not say white Americans were hardworking Americans. Those were her, her words.
MR. McAULIFFE: Well, she was, she was paraphrasing the AP story. And, Tim, listen, both Clintons have worked their whole life on civil rights issues; Hillary, her entire life, has been working on issues, on education, on health care. They both have been out there fighting hard. This is the end of a long campaign. It hasn't been, contrary to what a lot of people say, I don't think this has been an overly aggressive campaign, at the end, against each other. 1992, I think, was much worse. But listen, the stakes are huge. We have to win this election November 4th.
MR. RUSSERT: Many undeclared superdelegates are obviously listening to this discussion...
MR. McAULIFFE: Yeah, sure.
MR. RUSSERT: ...and to the debate that's been going on. Here's a report from the New York Post: "Hillary Rodham Clinton played the race card as she dismissed Barack Obama as a candidate who can't win support from `white Americans.' ... The `white Americans' remark drew a swift rebuke from some superdelegates, and private dismay from several Democratic" party "officials who said they're concerned about reuniting the factionalized party. Muriel Offerman, a North Carolina superdelegate who has not disclosed her choice, said: `That should not have been said. I think it drives a wedge, a racial wedge, that's not what the Democratic Party's about.' ... Massachusetts [undeclared] superdelegate Debra Kozikowski said: `That's distressing. ... I'm not even sure how to respond to that. I'd like to think that it was not intended to be what it sounds" "but... it" "sounds like trying to split the country down the middle.'" Those are undeclared superdelegates responding to Hillary comments about race.
MR. McAULIFFE: And you know what? I can put up 30, 40 more superdelegates who will say, you know, talk about what the Clintons have done on the race issue. First of all, I hate that even race is even in the--we should not have it. We shouldn't have race, we shouldn't have gender."
Well, that last statement is really on the mark. It shouldn't be about race and gender and it would help enormously to keep it off the .... (Terry didn't finish his sentence, maybe he realised he was wandering into the twilight zone) if the candidate herself does not put it front and center in the discussion.
David Axelrod on Fox News Sunday :
"WALLACE: Mr. Axelrod, what do you think of a Democratic presidential candidate describing the race in such stark racial terms?
AXELROD: Well, I have to assume that Senator Clinton didn't say that the way she wanted to say it. I don't imagine that she chose the words as she would if you asked her that question again.
And the truth is that that isn't even the fact. In Indiana, we split voters who make $50,000 a year or less evenly. We did better among non-college-educated voters there. And the same is true in North Carolina than in some of the immediately -- immediate preceding states.
And we've done well across the country in various states with these voters.
WALLACE: Well, let me just ask you, though, Mr. Axelrod...
AXELROD: So the thesis itself is -- was wrong. The words weren't well chosen, but the thesis was wrong.
WALLACE: Why are the words not well chosen? Forgetting whether they're accurate or not, I mean, what do you find offensive about talking about white voters not going for Obama?
AXELROD: Well, I'm sure that Senator Clinton didn't mean to conflate hard-working Americans and white Americans in the same sentence. I know she doesn't believe that, and I don't think she meant to, and I'm sure Howard would say the same thing.
WALLACE: Well, let me ask you about that.
AXELROD: I think there are a lot of hard-working Americans of all backgrounds and races and ethnicities, and of course she believes that, too."
That is how this is done. Admit that you've made a mistake and then explain based on the evidence of past work and engagement in civil rights, that it's logical to assume that it was simply a slip of the tongue
But Howard and Terry are not saying that, because only at sniper-rifle point, with video evidence proving a 100 % sure that the facts are undeniable, will Hillary, grudgingly, sort of admit to a mistake.
There are a lot of positive reasons why I prefer Barack Obama as president, but this negative reason is the clincher for me. Someone who is so stupidly stubborn in refusing to admit to a mistake should not be the President of the United States.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 24 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.