What's Next for (Bill) Clinton and the Anti-Obama Attack Machine?

| Sat Jan. 26, 2008 6:28 PM PST

"Ladies and gentlemen, this is an interesting race." So said former President Bill at a campaign rally in Independence, Missouri, on Saturday night, while Barack Obama was cleaning his wife's clock in South Carolina. Well, Bill Clinton has done his best to make the contest more interesting—and more down-and-dirty. Campaigning in South Carolina, he drew Barack Obama into a mudwrestle and sucked up plenty of oxygen. Though Clinton failed to stop a much-anticipated Obama win in the Palmetto State—and might have even pushed voters toward Obama—he certainly helped shaped the race to his wife's benefit. Obama has been campaigning as an unconventional and inspirational leader against a conventional and divisive politician. Yet the ex-president managed to turn the contest into a face-off between two acrimonious camps, which undermines Obama's preferred narrative: a transformational candidate versus a Washington rerun. And today—before the vote-counting began—Clinton compared Obama to Jesse Jackson. It was tough not to read Clinton's remark as an attempt to dismiss Obama as the black candidate who cannot win.

Clinton's hit-man role has peeved some Democrats. Two days ago, Robert Reich, who was Clinton's labor secretary, blogged that "Bill Clinton's ill-tempered and ill-founded attacks on Barack Obama are doing no credit to the former President, his legacy, or his wife's campaign." But should the Clintons care if they lose Reich but gain the nomination?

Short answer: no. But there will be recriminations. Clinton's South Carolina rampage will not be forgotten by Democrats and liberals. And it remains to be seen if B. Clinton will continue his anti-Obama crusade in the coming days, as Supersaturated Tuesday approaches. The day before South Carolina Democrats voted for Obama over Clinton by a two-to-one margin, I asked a senior Clinton campaign aide if the campaign had any reservations about Bill Clinton's actions in South Carolina. This aide looked pained. "He cannot be controlled," s/he said. I remarked that it looked as if Clinton had been deployed in a strategic manner. "Not for some of us," the aide said. But the campaign could have decided not to send him to South Carolina, I noted. "Yeah, Mr. President, we have some important campaign rallies for you to attend in Alaska," the aide replied—sarcastically.

Continues Below

Continued From Above

Can it be that Bill Clinton is a rogue operative? I doubt it. He still has to answer to his wife, and she has an influential role in the campaign. But it might be that within the Clinton campaign there are those who will do much to win and those who will do whatever it takes to win. Hillary Clinton often decries the Republican attack machine (and sells herself as a candidate tough enough to survive its blasts). But she has an attack machine of her own. And it has cooked up some rather audacious if not bogus charges against Obama—including, most recently, the accusation that Obama is soft on Ronald Reagan.

In a triumphant victory speech on Saturday night—one of his best adressess—Obama lashed back:

We are up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as President comes from longevity in Washington or proximity to the White House. But we know that real leadership is about candor, and judgment, and the ability to rally Americans from all walks of life around a common purpose—a higher purpose.

We are up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner; it's the kind of partisanship where you're not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea—even if it's one you never agreed with. That kind of politics is bad for our party, it's bad for our country, and this is our chance to end it once and for all.

But will "that kind of politics" cease? Will the Clinton camp ratchet down after South Carolina? Will the leash on the Big Dawg be tightened? Not if the Clinton crew (at the top) view South Carolina as a battlefield loss but a strategic success in their effort to de-Obama Obama.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Come on,Corn. Do you really need to pussyfoot around Bill and Hill's race baiting here. Remember Sister Souljah? How about the retarded black man on death row that Bill had to rush back to Arkansas to kill during the 92 campaign to prove his bona fides to Southern whites?

OK, you have to cultivate your sources in all the campaigns. But your allegiance as a journalist should be to the clear and direct truth.

Sometimes you have to look to your ideological adversaries to hear the truth. Here is an article referencing Dick Morris commenting on the Clinton Strategy.

"Former Clintonista Dick Morris knows. He knows better than anyone alive how the HillBillys think, and he sees what I see. He's figured out the brilliant if repulsive campaign strategy of the Clintons, and how they have turned South Carolina into their Venus Fly Trap. The Obama campaign will fly in, breathe deep the sweet smell of electoral success and then never escape.

In fact, it is possible Obama won't win a single state after South Carolina. He could even lose his home state of Illinois.

Why?

As Morris puts it:

"If Hillary loses South Carolina and the defeat serves to demonstrate Obama's ability to attract a block vote among black Democrats, the message will go out loud and clear to white voters that this is a racial fight. That will trigger a massive white backlash against Obama and will drive white voters to Hillary Clinton."

No matter what happens in South Carolina today - even if Obama wins a plurality among white voters - the Clintons and their media stooges have turned South Carolina into "the black primary."

In fact, the bigger his win, the more it reinforces the campaign-killing message that Barack Obama is "their" candidate."

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1069047

I was watching the boob tube. Obama was giving his victory speach in SC. I was shocked to see mainly white folks sitting behind him. Why would he set the stage in such a way? Did only whites attend the event? No! He is playing the RACE CARD! I have been to dozens of events such as this. Staff workers hand out posters and direct attendies where to sit and when to applaud. This makes my stomach turn. Wake up and smell propaganda.

To "Truth":
I don't know what speech you were watching but I saw an extremely diverse group of people standing behind Obama:

"I have been to dozens of events such as this. Staff workers hand out posters and direct attendies where to sit and when to applaud."

They're called political rallies. Everyone does it. Your alternative apparently is to not vote.

"Can it be that Bill Clinton is a rogue operative? I doubt it."

Hard to imagine Bill as a clueless campaigner.

They will do whatever works - it seems like the rabid dog - scorched earth BS is not working.

I expect a change in rhetoric.

Actually, at the two Obama events I've attended, the people on the stage were made up mostly of the volunteers who RSVP'd to work special shifts the day before or the day of the rally.

I'm sure a few more friends and family of VIPs were added to the mix...but the only physical attribute I heard mentioned during the placement of folks was...GASP!...HEIGHT!

-just sayin'

The day will come when the color of the stage people will matter less.

Someday soon, I hope.

Who cares what color they are, really.

It is as superficial as their haircuts or outfits.

The HillBillys and vague hopes that Obama offers are no match for the TRUTH MACHINE of the RON PAUL REVOLUTION! Irregardless of whom the next president is, the consciousness of the nation has changed! WE are a generation of aware and focused citizens, free and informed. Ethnicity, and corporate ties, are irrelevant to people who care about their descendants and the prosperity of a NATION. When the leaders of a nation are "Banker's Puppets" the people will ignore them! In THE END we will and strive for TRUTH, and FREEDOM!

the TRUTH MACHINE of the RON PAUL REVOLUTION!"

Like his racist, homophobic, anti-semetic newsletters?

I'm afraid time is not on Obama's side. while Democrats are becoming increasingly alarmed and disgusted by the Clinton's behavior the glut of primaries on February 5 are coming up too soon. I think he'll fall short, and the Clinton's will have the path cleared to the nomination. When the results come in on February 5 and the clinton's have won the day you'll feel the excitemant and enthusiasm for this election drain out. Younger voters, independants and alot of Democrats will fall away.

If the primaries taking place next week were still a few weeks off I'd say Obama would come out on top.

thank you for this nice

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote> <img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Photo Essays

When you dial a 1-900 number, who picks up the phone?
Meet the KKK's seamstress of hate couture.
The other side of Gitmo.
A photographer’s year at Angola Prison.