Bill and Hillary Clinton (Billary) Have Blown Off the Black Vote

posted by Rock Hackshaw
Fri, 01/11/2008 - 3:10pm

In January of 1980, I started attending Columbia University in New York; it was a presidential election year. Ted Kennedy was reluctantly challenging President Jimmy Carter for the Democrat’s nomination. With freshman excitement I followed the on-campus involvement in the race between these two. Then one day Ted Kennedy came to our uptown campus, bringing media, cameras and controversy. You see, some imaginative white kid (and believe me when I say that at Obama’s alma-mater Columbia U, kids of all races and ethnicities were very very imaginative in my day there) stole the show.

This youngster stole the headlines in the newspapers- and the highlights on television- when he placed a large colorful cardboard placard behind Ted Kennedy’s head. It said: “Will You Test Drive a Used Car With This Man?”

Needless to say that Kennedy’s presidential stock started falling from that moment. He lost the primary to Jimmy Carter despite double-digit unemployment and double-digit inflation during the tenure of Carter’s administration. For those who don’t get the punch line let me give you one hint: Chappaquiddick (or Google it along with Kennedy’s name/lol)

In some esoteric circles on campus a debate raged as to the propriety of this kid’s action. Many felt that he had overstepped his boundaries, since this incident (Chappaquiddick) was a personal tragedy for many. Others felt that in politics and political campaigns, every/ and anything goes; in the end the voters decide. Well we are at that moment in presidential politics again: where does propriety start and end. Did the Clintons cross the bounds of propriety when they desperately pulled all the stops to win (steal?) the New Hampshire (NH) primary? Did they go too far? Did they cross the line? Eventually the voters will judge; but I say they did.

Yesterday one of South Carolina’s black representatives in the House (Rep. James Clayburn; the dean of black democrats) expressed disgust at Hilary Clinton’s put down of Martin Luther King’s contribution to the civil rights gains of the sixties. He is considering endorsing someone other than Hillary in the upcoming primary (Obama or Edwards), after deliberately staying neutral in the race. He is also angry at Bill Clinton’s calling of Barack Obama’s campaign a “fairy tale”. This comes behind Rep. Conyers calling for a anti-Hillary campaign in Michigan‘s primary-where she is the only candidate on the ballot. And don’t forget John Kerrey’s endorsement of Barack- coming hastily as it did yesterday. What you are seeing folks, is a sinking ship being deserted in droves by humans, rats, roaches, fleas, flies, moths, you name it. I expect Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean and Al Gore to follow John Kerrey’s lead.

When I wrote my last column (Hillary Clinton Stole the New Hampshire Primary and Should be Punished) many here couldn’t understand it; so what did they do: they attacked me. Fine. We will see who gets the last laugh when this thing is over. What the Clintons didn’t understand in their New Hampshire desperation was that their tactics would backfire eventually. They also didn’t understand that you could win the battle (NH primary) but lose the war (the nomination).

What has been slowly evolving over the past few days after her NH victory is an anti- Clinton groundswell in the black community. She will be crushed in South Carolina; watch. And she will lose Nevada also; watch. What my detractors here -like Wonk, JP (whoever the hell this is) and others- don’t get, is that I am usually ahead of the pack in my political analysis. Bill and Hillary Clinton fucked up big time in New Hampshire. You guys thought I was just spewing sour grapes; time will tell.

When she concluded in a stump speech that Martin Luther King only dreamed, and that Lyndon B. Johnson delivered civil rights (because he was a “doer” like she is), she “violated” (as the kids say on the streets). She will pay a price for this. When she (in her teary moment) said: “I just don’t want to see us (the country) fall backwards”, she was insinuating that a loss for her (and a win for Barack/ since he was way ahead in the polls) would send the country in some type of downward spiral; and insinuated in a racially coded way, that the half-black guy doesn’t fit the bill. When they both (Billary) suggested that this half-white guy “was an easy target for AlQaeda”, again they were suggesting in a coded way that Barack Obama isn’t up to scratch; you can’t trust the reins of this country to him. They knew exactly what they were doing. They knew it only too well. These are two exceptional people with highly developed intellects folks. Don’t be hoodwinked folks.

By touching the Holy Grail (MLK) of blacks in the USA, Hillary Clinton blew off the black vote. When she and her hubby basically accused Barack of peddling “false hopes” and essentially minimized him as a dreamer, and basically trivialized him as naïve and idealistic, it was all racially coded. What they have failed to grasp (like near everyone else) is that Barack’s core support (until now) has been young whites. These voters distrust the old school of politicians that Bilary belongs to. That’s why he is doing so well: they are coming out to vote for him. Why do you think you are seeing record votes so far? It’s because he is attracting people who don’t usually participate in this process. He is quite inspirational. He is magical.

When she accused Obama of “raising false hopes”, she portrayed him as unrealistic; it was a subtle put down. Barack was swift in responding that JFK didn’t look at the moon and say: “can’t happen”. He further went on to say that Martin Luther King didn’t look at the task ahead, and tell that large crowd at his “I Have a Dream” speech: the same thing. Both JFK and MLK had the audacity to dream and hope. Barack won that round and it will show eventually.

Hillary Clinton-the former head of Republican chapters in high school and college-, who enthusiastically supported Barry Goldwater for president, is too calculating for her own good. Remember Barry Goldwater was one of those white leaders who placed his political body in front of the civil rights train, trying to block human decency, progress, justice and common sense. If we are going to judge and castigate (as Clinton supporters have) Barack Obama’s drug use as a youth, why can’t we judge and castigate Hillary for her Goldwater support as a youth? It’s called: even Steven.

Are you really surprised at her MLK put down given her background here? Are you going to contend that she was totally unaware of Goldwater’s civil rights positions? And where was she during the civil right days? What was she doing then?

You all must know that in the USA (as in many parts of the world), there are folks who believe that blacks are intellectually inferior to whites. This has been around long before Hitler’s theories on “Aryan superiority”. If the Clintons keep trivializing and minimizing Barack’s candidacy, what do you think they are doing in a coded way? They are suggesting that this mulatto is inferior. Why else would Bill say that to elect Barack is “to roll the dice”? And about his “fairy tale” comment; what is he saying: that a non-white could never be president? That that could only happen in a fairy tale? Or in a dream?

Let’s go further into Bill Clinton’s remarks. He said that the media didn’t scrutinize Barack’s comments about the war; they essentially gave him a pass. Look at the videotape and you will see Bill’s angry and sarcastic comments at the end of his lengthy tirade against Obama: “gimme a break” (he actually said “gimme a break”). He insinuated that Barack was far from forthright or honest, when he (Obama) said that didn’t know if he would have voted for the authorization of the war- if he was actually in Congress at the time (and I assume privy to the classified briefings and such). What Clinton failed to say in that statement was that Barack further amplified it with this: “I don’t know what I would have done; but what I do know is (for the war) the case wasn’t made” (from his vantage point outside congress). Can’t you guys see what Bill was doing there: undermining Barack’s credibility on the Iraq war- and his position against the war from jump street- with a cheap trick; a distortion? It was low.

Understand the battle here: Barack Obama is claiming that it isn’t only about experience, it’s also about judgement; and that Hillary showed bad judgement when she voted to authorize this war, and also by failing to apologize for her vote. So they have to chip away at this and in so doing they have taken on the issue. This is why Bill went after Barack’s vote to fund the troops; it is just that he conveniently failed to mention that Hillary also voted to continue funding the troops; deliberate amnesia I guess. Or was it another attempt at chicanery?

So Bill Clinton- of “I had no relations with that woman” fame- has the chutzpah to question Barack’s credibility. Bill Clinton-of “it depends on what is means” fame- has the gumption to suggest that Barack is dishonest. Well, now you have to excuse me when I say: gimme a friggin break. Barack Obama (as I told you all in August/ see my “Barack’s ATM” column) is the most exciting candidate ever to contest a US presidential primary. He is delivering some of the greatest stump speeches ever delivered by a presidential candidate. If you don’t believe me then ask Tim Russert (NBC) and the many others who have publicly said it. And don’t forget that Tim Russert only wrote presidential speeches for a living once or twice in his lifetime.

This is the man (Obama) that the Clintons are trying to diminish, denigrate, tear down, pull down, demean, pulverize and trivialize (amongst other things). A man who returns their bows and arrows with dignity and grace; who returns their sling-shots with taste, style and wit; and who suffers their indignities with the patience of a diplomat. One of these days, the black side of him is going to go upside their heads; watch. If he doesn’t lose it and break on these two-before Hilary’s inevitable and complete meltdown (which I saw coming since November/remember my column) - then the bad boy is a saint (nothing less). Don’t forget that I have warned you all- over and over- that there is a zillion ton gorilla at the back of the room: racism.

In essence, Bill Clinton has called Barack Obama a snake-oil salesman. Furthermore, he is suggesting that Obama is untruthfully and dishonestly peddling false hopes. The way, timing and manner in which Bill Clinton has done this, is something blacks would not forgive him for. Especially coming from a man with so many character flaws; a man who blacks have stood up for over and over and again when he was relentlessly attacked by white folks. This is a backstab from the Clintons and blacks know it. Watch.

The constant theme within the undertones of the Clintonian messages about Barack Obama is simple: this black (half-white) man is not comparable to Hillary (how audacious to even think it); he can’t measure up and doesn’t have her experience; he is inferior in every way. It plays right in to the historical fears, lapses into ignorance, lapses of insecurity, lapses of judgement, angst from the uncertainties of the future and the unknown, plus the awesome prejudices of some (oft times many) white folks. Don’t be naïve folks; there is a purpose to all this. Read my articles on this race again; read my warnings again; you will understand all this better. This is some deep stuff; it’s way over many folks heads (most folks).

Recently on this site, my detractors unfairly called me sexist and racist, despite my body of writings here that clearly show who and what I am, in both ideology and thinking. I am no racist. I have said over and over and again, that racism goes both sides of the tracks (black and white) in the good ole USA. I must admit though that I do have a lil male chauvinism in my bones. I will suggest that it’s a cultural hangover from my island upbringing. I am working on it; I am still a work in progress; God isn’t finished with me as yet/lol.

The attacks on me came because of my last column, where I brought to your attention some of the stuff that went on in NH. Just yesterday, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, another presidential candidate on the democrat’s side of the fence, intoned that he wants to challenge the NH primary results because of the many claims of fraud coming from the field. NH officials said that’s fine but he will have to pay the costs. Of course when this blogger (Rock Hackshaw) raises this specter, I am soundly criticized on this website, by perennial detractors and player-haters. My info couldn’t be that good. My sources couldn’t be that good; no matter how many times over the years, I have proven the contrary. I am even castigated for making supposedly libelous statements, inferences or claims; this despite the fact that I blamed no one person in particular, for actual fraud.

I was not being a sore loser when I told you all that there were many things going on in NH, that were outside the pall; there were lots of irregularities and lots of dirty tricks. It was the desperation of the Clintons that induced all this; they are sore losers. Wait till she has to pull her candidacy after the super duper thumping she will get on “Super Tuesday”

(February 5th). Remember (again) I told you first.

On the streets in many black communities, folks will warn you in advance prior to you messing up (making a big mistake); they usually say: “don’t go there”. Hilary should have never “gone there” with her MLK remarks. To suggest that neither JFK nor MLK (especially) were the real heroes of the civil rights era was a major major faux-pas. It was a big time mistake. They have blown off the black vote and they will spend a long time and a lot of resources trying to fix this one; unsuccessfully.

Stay tuned-in folks; you can stick a fork in the Clintons: they are done. They are as cooked as chicken leg at a summer barbecue in any black household.