By Nitya

Jan 29, 2008 7:53am

False pushback from the Clinton campaign itself

The Clinton campaign is now officially — and erroneously — challenging how the media reported former President Bill Clinton’s comparison of Sen. Barack Obama to Rev. Jesse Jackson.

On CNN a Clinton senior adviser claimed before he made his comments about Jackson the former president had been "asked about historic voting in South Carolina," said Rep. Kendrick Meek, D-Florida.

Watch Meek HERE

"The real issue is the reporting of what the president is actually saying," Meek said, accusing the media of "clip and snip."

Read the transcript for yourself HERE.

What Meek says happened is simply not so. No one brought up historic voting in South Carolina.

– jpt

User Comments

as expected. the clinton campaign has some really slick tactics. they must not know how to proceed any other way.

Posted by: Debs | January 29, 2008, 8:12 am 8:12 am

p.s. you have an extra period at the end of the URL (after .html) in the transcript link, which makes it broken when you click on it.

Posted by: Debs | January 29, 2008, 8:15 am 8:15 am

The American people are a lot smarter then the Clinton’s seem to think.
Bill needs to go hang out at his girl friends house until this thing is over.

Posted by: James Brown | January 29, 2008, 8:22 am 8:22 am

Jake Tapper — It’s rather silly of you to miss the most important “fact” on Bill Clinton’s comment, and it is that the Jesse Jackson – Barack Obama comparison/comment was made the “morning” of election day in South Carolina (Meeks said it was after they had breakfast).
This makes a lot of difference about the contextual meaning of BC’s statement.

Posted by: Otillap | January 29, 2008, 8:31 am 8:31 am

The media spins everything out of the Clinton camp to sound negative. It’s not new and the Republicans are eating it up. The Obama love fest is getting a little old and tired. I bought the message of change the first 100 or so times, but I still haven’t heard anything of substance coming out of the Obama camp. I don’t want my candidate elected because of he’s exciting at pep-rallies and delivers inspirational church sermons. I will vote for Hillary Clinton on Feb. 5.

Posted by: Mary from Decatur, GA | January 29, 2008, 8:35 am 8:35 am

I can only echo Joseph Welch’s comments which, in this instance, are directed to the Husband-Who-Will-Not-SHut-Up: “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

Posted by: chuck | January 29, 2008, 8:39 am 8:39 am

If Obama were a white male at the same age, with the same abilities that won SC by that margin and had gotten endorsed by the Kennedys 2 days later, he would be ahead in the polls by 15%.

Posted by: dionysus | January 29, 2008, 9:01 am 9:01 am

Mary, vote for whoever you want, but Obama has plenty of detail and specifics to his proposals. Check out his website, or speak to somebody involved with the campaign.

Posted by: David | January 29, 2008, 9:26 am 9:26 am

Jesse Jackson stated that he was not offended by President Clinton’s remarks.
Enough said!

Posted by: yoga82 | January 29, 2008, 9:29 am 9:29 am

Do we really need another 4 years of Bill Clinton (& Monica) in the White House? Maybe if Bill had spent more time focusing on terror after the first world trade center bombing instead of diddling Monica, the 2nd bombing may have been prevented. Furthermore, how stupid are we to listen to Hiliary’s pandering dribble. Say anything to get elected…Should Obama be debating Bill instead. He seems to be handling her dirty work…Bill will be the democratic version of Karl Rove & Dick Cheney, with Hiliary the puppet. If Hiliary gets the nomination, I wonder how many Democrats will vote Republican?

Posted by: Bill | January 29, 2008, 9:34 am 9:34 am

I think Obama planted the racial divide on purpose to cause a rift and then take advantage of the rift. Listen up people – American will not elect an African American president – ain’t going to happen. If we Democrats have Obama as our nominee, we will lose the election and be subjected to another 4 years of Republican idiocy. Please, please, consider what I am saying and help us elect Hillary Clinton as our nominee. Thank you for listening.

Posted by: caribel | January 29, 2008, 9:40 am 9:40 am

The Clintons alone are putting themselves out of the race. Obama has never been negative to them. When needed He straighten the record, but never played dirty at the Clintons.
It is obviously a big show to see Hillary unable to run on her own merit and when Bill has to come to help her, he just screw things up beyond the point of repair. Now she is doing her part in screwing things with her insistence in breaking her own commitment not to play in Florida.
I thought the race would go well past beyond Feb. 5th. but it seems that now we all know who is going to be the nominated and who will be in the White House a year from now: Barack Obama.

Posted by: J. Perez Acosta | January 29, 2008, 9:53 am 9:53 am

Didn’t Jesse Jackson himself say he wasn’t offended? This smells like a media induced story to me. Damn, we are so guillable.

Posted by: Amazed | January 29, 2008, 10:05 am 10:05 am

clinton company is sick and their supporteres are sick too. better motivate, inspire and get votes. dont play this rubbish race card please. this is the America of the 21isst century.go obama go. no need to worry about these dirty games.

Posted by: david | January 29, 2008, 10:07 am 10:07 am

Caribel, I have considered what you said. You said, please vote for Hillary Clinton because she is white. Geez, you make Bill look subtle.

Posted by: phillygirl | January 29, 2008, 10:21 am 10:21 am

Nicely played by Obama. In sc he played African american card asking for vote saying that an “African American is electable” and on the very election day says “racial stuff was created by media”. Means he wants to go to other states without playing the same card..Clintons have been tricked.Try scrutinizing Obama’s comments just 1-2 days before SC primary and just on the day of SC primary before blaming Clintons.People are not seeing through the same lense.

Posted by: dash | January 29, 2008, 10:21 am 10:21 am

It’s not a matter of whether Jesse Jackson was offended by Clinton’s note.
It’s a matter of the Clinton feeding to the nation’s past angst about electing a person of color as president.
That’s the issue. Is Obama playing the race card? Sure, he is. In any card game, it’s about strategy and playing the hand you’ve been dealt. The “race card” strategy isn’t just an attack strategy but it’s also a strategy that deals with skillful response. And that’s what we are seeing.

Posted by: OneTwo | January 29, 2008, 10:27 am 10:27 am

Regarding caribel’s post that people should support Clinton because the nation is too racist to elect an African American:
I am struck by how similar that saw — one being pushed by hordes of Hillary supporters — sounds to another time in America when so many supposedly, good, decent, and non-racist fought against desegregation. Their excuse wasn’t because they were racist themselves –oh, no, it was for any number of other reasons, all based around the unfortunate and pitiable racism of “those other” folks. It just isn’t the right time, yet, they incessantly argued.
This is the same canard that many of the Clinton forces have been pushing for months at the grassroots level. Barack Obama should not be supported, they argue, because he is African American, and well, tisk, tisk, everyone knows that that rules him out of certain opportunities in America.
This, from the people so supposedly progressive on social justice issues. this from a woman who said in her own autobiography that the person who had the biggest influence on her political philosophy and development was Martin Luther King, Jr. this from a President who owed every single successful campaign he waged, from Attorney General and Governor of Arkansas to two terms in the white House (Bill clinton has never received the majority of the white vote in any election he has been a candidate in).
I would simply refer caribel and his/her ilk to MLK’s seminal “Letter From the Birmingham Jail” a letter which was written not in response to the racist Bull Connor’s of the South, but to the supposedly liberal clergymen who attacked King and other civil rights demonstrators for having the temerity to assert that they should have the same basic rights and opportunities.

Posted by: nupe82 | January 29, 2008, 10:32 am 10:32 am

Let’s go the the SC results.
2008 Obama -55%
1988 Jackson -55%
Bill Clinton deserves an apology and a well done. Nice call Bill.

Posted by: GEEVILL | January 29, 2008, 10:46 am 10:46 am

Who played that “race card” first?
Here’s Obama’s campaign co-chair, Jesse Jackson, Jr., early in January, talking about Hillary Clinton’s emotional moment:
“…there were tears that melted the Granite State. And those are tears that Mrs. Clinton cried on that day, clearly moved voters. She somehow connected with those voters.
But those tears also have to be analyzed. They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs. Clinton did not cry for, particularly as we head to South Carolina where 45% of African-Americans who participate in the Democratic contest, and they see real hope in Barack Obama.”

Posted by: Herewegoagain | January 29, 2008, 11:32 am 11:32 am

In Iowa, when Huck won it was pointed out that it was in large measure because their was an inordinate number of evangelicals attending the Iowa caucus. Moreover, for historical reference the very good showing of the Reverend Pat Robertson in the 1988 Iowa caucus was cited. Now, was this reprehensible religious bigotry?

Posted by: GW | January 29, 2008, 11:35 am 11:35 am

OK. Now can we discuss Rove/Griffin caging African-American voters in Florida. See Greg Palast BBC reports not picked up by US press. Dems should get over themselves and go after the real racial politics practiced by Rove, et.al.

Posted by: Pilgrim | January 29, 2008, 11:59 am 11:59 am

Jake,
Please explain to me what all this bruhaha is about? I am not sure what everyone is even arguing over. Also Jake Tapper what is the email to which we can send you stuff at abc? Do you have a public one?
It has been obvious since MI and was reinforced in NV in the exit polls that the black dem vote was heavily for obama. S. Carolina was polling the same way, and demographically has a huge and very important black dem community. Bill highlights this via the historic Jackson campaigns and suddenly it’s a kerfluffle?
Bill is essentially dodging very hostile obama questions targeted at him. He repeats 3 times that he is “not taking the bait today.”
Specifically on the Jackson thing Bill is asked. “What does it say about Barak Obama that it takes two of you to beat him?”
Bill laughs, restates the his view that he will not take bait and then states his answer, which is based on the demographic and historical realities of S. Carolina. I don’t see what the problem is.
I mean it’s not like the president was not under assault in this line of questioning. The implication is that Bill’s PR is unfair. Does Bill have no choice but to agree with the questioner?
I think it’s an amazing strength in a candidacy to take and address hostile questions. We don’t see Team Bush II/Cheney even letting these type of questions into the same room.

Posted by: smacfarl | January 29, 2008, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm

I think it is very ironic that the same media that over looked the transgessions by the Clintons in the past, have chosen to finally focus on this very untruthful and scheming family.

Posted by: JRH | January 29, 2008, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm

Here’s the thing OBama is not even “black,” his mother was caucasian and his father was African. He has chosen to declare himself as African American because of his color alone.I am not naive; I understand that society labels us all by the color of our skin. OBama has the opportunity to be inclusive; to unite whites and blacks around one man who can represent both racially and ethnically. Also, it seems to me that stating the obvious (since OBama declares himself African American)is all that has been done here by the Clintons. He is the black candidate and Hillary is the woman candidate. Those factors don’t take anything away from there candidacies, rather bring something new and exciting to the debate. The media has carried on like “the race card” has been slapped upside OBama’s head and there could have been no greater insult hurled at him. I think the MEDIA is playing dirty poker. Sexism by the media has been far more insulting than racism by the Clintons!!

Posted by: Dona | January 29, 2008, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.