Latino Hillary Supporter: Obama's Problem Is He's Black
Hillary Clinton is distancing herself from comments by Dallas supporter and Hispanic community leader Adelfa Callejo, who said yesterday that Barack Obama would have trouble gaining Latino support because he "simply has a problem that he happens to be black."
A local TV station asked Hillary a question reminiscent of Tim Russert's exchange with Barack Obama, asking if she rejects Callejo's support. "I want us judged on our merits," Clinton said. "I believe strongly that the fact that we have an African-American and a woman running for the Democratic nomination is historical and I'm very, very proud of that. I want people though to look beyond, look beyond race and gender, look at our records, look what we stand for, look what we've done."
The campaign later issued a statement: "After confirming that they were accurately portrayed, Senator Clinton, of course, denounces and rejects them."
Or, another way of saying: "After confirming that Clinton was getting flack for being hypocritical in not denouncing nor rejecting the statements at first, we then decided to renounce and reject it."
February 28, 2008 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I feel like some people here are losing their grip on reality, out of desperation to portray Clinton as some kind of she-devil.
She was told in an interview that a supporter had made a race-based comment on Obama, and she said that she thinks its wrong to judge on the basis of race, but that until she sees the whole quote she won't comment further - it's not like the media never takes things out of context!
Then, they release the statement "after confirming that they were accurately portrayed, Senator Clinton, of course, denounces and rejects them."
How on earth is that not a reasonable response? You people are bonkers!
February 28, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yet another example of media bias:
Hillary is being question about negative things associated with her campaign.
How dare they!!
What's next? Asking her about tax returns, uranium money deals, gaping holes in her health plan, her personal condust at Walmart?
If she loses, it's all because of you racally reporters!
February 28, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is too funny. Another stupid argument coming back to bite her in the ass (like the ridiculous plagiarism thing) - will she not learn? If she was only guided by the believe that "those in glass houses..." she wouldn't get herself into these stupid binds.
February 28, 2008 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know you have come on to this website for a week and have done nothing, nothing at all, except trash Hillary Clinton. Fine, you are not alone.
But show your credibility and retract your foolish analogy between Farrakhan--a known, long-time maggot and anti-semite--and some two-bit latino leader from Dallas who nobody has ever heard of. If you can't have the grace and decency to do that, more importantly, retract your latest screed against HRC because, in fact, she did both "renounce and reject" the comment.
Ridiculous.
February 28, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your response makes no sense. Callejo directly referred to Obama's race - obviously bringing up the issue of race. Did Farrahkan talk about Hillary's gender? No he didn't.
While I'm no supporter of Farrakhan and I detest what he represents, this supporter directly attacked a candidate with racial undertones. Farrakhan did no such thing, so I think that this is actually worse than what Farrakhan did. Oh, and why is it that Hillary gets to wait to research it and think about it, before rejecting and denouncing it, whereas Obama has to do it right there in front of her on national TV?
Your argument has no merit.
February 28, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Denouce and reject? But do you ANIHILO-OBLITERATE THEM, Ms. Clinton? Do you condemn them? Do you disapprove of them? Hell, do you even disagree with them, you meanie/racist?"
February 28, 2008 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
no doubt, what a hypocrite..
she disgusts me
February 28, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Expressing an observation is nothing compared to the facts that John Lewis' flip flop was black racism and Obama is riding a wave of black racism based on skin color, supported by left wing liberals and the pro-Obama media.
February 28, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
WOW, you just totally nailed it!
Yes indeed, the most offensive and small minded comment in the thread, congrats!
February 28, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it obvious yet, the media isn't "pro-Obama", they just hate Hillary. Which is one reason why nominating her would be a disaster.
Seriously, if they media really likes one of our candidates then go with it, my god! The democratic party consistently nominates boring people, and gets crushed. It's madness!
We finally have a chance to nominate someone with some media savvy, and some people are acting like that's somehow a bad thing.
February 28, 2008 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, God forbid that Hillary Clinton should wait to "reject and denounce" the man's statement until she knew whether it was accurate.
Why can't they be like the Obama campaign and Josh Marshall, who use Drudge as their source to condemn the Clinton campaign without waiting for the Clinton campaign to verify a statement?
Of course, it's all a bit odd since Obama has known about Farrakhan and Farrakhan's connection to his own spiritual adviser for years upon years, and yet couldn't answer a direct question as to whether he would reject Farrakhan's support without being put on the spot by Hillary on the point.
February 28, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
She could have said "If that's accurate, then I of course denounce, reject, deject and renounce it"
February 28, 2008 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tell me, why is Clinton obliged to say anything about it until she verifies the accuracy and context of the statement?
Do you people have any basic respect for the truth, and understanding the full context of a remark or an event, before you make commitment about what you believe should be done?
As I said above, I guess not - look at how the Obama campaign, smear artists that they are, pounced on something sourced out of Drudge - Drudge! - as if it were established fact, and accused the Clinton campaign of doing something that was, in fact, never verified.
February 28, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Because the Clinton campaign has leaked plenty of things through Drudge this election cycle, e.g. their third-quarter 07 fundraising numbers. Clinton had no problem with Drudge when he helped her, but when a staffer hurt her image, she attacked Drudge rather than the staffer involved. The campaign obviously feels that Drudge is a reliable source, so why shouldn't everyone else? Why does Clinton get to pick and choose in every instance and the media is always accused of "bias"? Ugh.
February 28, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Because the Clinton campaign has leaked plenty of things through Drudge this election cycle, e.g. their third-quarter 07 fundraising numbers. Clinton had no problem with Drudge when he helped her, but when a staffer hurt her image, she attacked Drudge rather than the staffer involved. The campaign obviously feels that Drudge is a reliable source, so why shouldn't everyone else? Why does Clinton get to pick and choose in every instance and the media is always accused of "bias"? Ugh.
February 28, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
But will she censure, renounce, deject, denigrate, belittle or damn them?
It's very important that we find out exactly how many synonyms she uses. Clearly two is just barely covering it. If she really wants to distance herself she should go for at least 9, maybe 11.
February 28, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Disclaimer: I support Obama and I am relishing the desperate, shrill death-rattle of the DLC. Poetic Justice for having promoted that “too angry” meme about Dean. YARRRRRRRR, Hillary!
But I have lived in Mexico and interact with both Latinos and black Americans (some of my best friends, yadda yadda...) and IMO the Clinton Latino is just being candid. Many Latinos, especially Mexican transplants, are more prejudice than your cliche Alabama redneck. Hillary will definitely get more of the Latino vote than she would if Obama were white and that is just a regrettable fact, Jack.
I don't see any reason for Hillary to re or de nounce this guy's statement.
February 28, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes she does. If she's going to go out of her way to admonish Obama to not simply "denounce" but to "reject" the support of someone who's made anti-Semitic statements in the past, even though that person has no association with Obama's campaign, then it's certainly not too much to expect Clinton to do the same when someone who is DIRECTLY INVOLVED with her campaign. Obama has an argument about how to reject the support of someone he doesn't want support from. Hillary is bringing this woman to campaign stops with her.
I wonder if she's denounced and rejected Bob Johnson yet.
February 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
John Lewis flipped because his constituents voted for Obama three times as often as Hillary Clinton. And that was *with* his support.
Hillary Clinton has a lot of high-profile black support. The problem is that many of her endorsers--of all colors, shapes, and sizes-- never imagined that there might be a BETTER candidate. Not a blacker candidate, a BETTER candidate.
Many of them now wish they had remained neutral or went Obama.
I love how the racially-inclined (racistly-inclined?) are so desperate to use the power of the "race-card" card that they shoehorn it in even when it doesn't fit: "The black guy Obama was running against the white woman Hillary when the black guy Lewis, endorsed her. Now, nearly a dozen losses in a row later, the black guy Lewis wants to change his endorsement of Hillary. It must be because Obama is a black guy."
Right.
It can't be because he doesn't want to back a loser. It can't be because he wants to keep his own job. It can't be because he accepted the inevitability of HRC's nomination and is now regretting it. It can't be because he has witnessed the puzzling ineptness of HRC's campaign and thinks that she will lose the general election.
Couldn't be that. After all, he's black.
February 28, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Someone ping me when we're talking about issues that actually matter to people.
February 28, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
She is a total hillpocrite:
http://thepersonalispolitical.tumblr.com/post/27523616
February 28, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, "distancing herself" meant she stepped away one foot away from Callejo and stopped embracing her, and wiped the lipstick from her cheek.
When asked about "denounce and reject" the campaign clarified the candidate thought she had been asked to "pronounce and project" which was why she was speaking slower and louder.
February 28, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is that many of her endorsers--of all colors, shapes, and sizes-- never imagined that there might be a BETTER candidate. Not a blacker candidate, a BETTER candidate.
Thank you! Well said.
Sen. Obama's candidacy, IMO, is bringing lots of things to the fore--namely, the dissatisfaction many constituents feel toward their representatives. Some CBC members are perceived to be unresponsive and unrepresentative of the voters' interest. And if they see that their constituents can put up the type of numbers for Obama without them--because he's a better candidate--then they know what can happen to them when faced with a better candidate. And frankly, some of these folks should be challenged because they are way too comfortable with little to show.
But it's not nearly enough to simply endorse Sen. Obama. Just ask Al Wynn.
February 28, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting that Hillary Clinton "rejects and dencounces" the comments of Ms. Callejo, not the support, as she pushed Obama to do. I guess she can't afford to reject the support.
February 28, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I live in a predominantly black neighborhood - the violence and hatred directed at non-white immigrants by some African Americans is an embarrassment and a disgrace to the memory of Dr. King. However, by trying to use this crisis for a political advantage, Callejo stands condemn like other black leaders who have allowed ignorance, poverty, self-hatred and nihilism to thrive unchecked. Callejo should never make the mistake of comparing the crisis in our neighborhood to the kind of racism practiced by white supremacists.
February 29, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink