Hillary's Obama/MLK/LBJ comments could hurt her in SC.

In discussing Hillary's comments about Obama, MLK, and LBJ, I did not detail possible consequences of those comments. However, my initial thoughts were about the primary in South Carolina--a state where approximately 50% of the Democratic electorate is African American.

And now there is an indication that Hillary might have done herself some damage in South Carolina. As reported in today's New York Times,

Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest-ranking African-American in Congress, said he was rethinking his neutral stance in his state’s presidential primary out of disappointment at comments by Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton that he saw as diminishing the historic role of civil rights activists.

Mr. Clyburn, a veteran of the civil rights movement and a power in state Democratic politics, put himself on the sidelines more than a year ago to help secure an early primary for South Carolina, saying he wanted to encourage all candidates to take part. But he said recent remarks by the Clintons that he saw as distorting civil rights history could change his mind.

The only thing that surprises me about this is that I thought something similar would have happened before now. I guess maybe Clyburn wanted to give Hillary a chance to rectify the situation, and felt that if she hadn't done so by now (which she has not, as discussed below), she was not going to. Here is part of what Clyburn had to say about Hillary's comments:

“We have to be very, very careful about how we speak about that era in American politics,” said Mr. Clyburn, who was shaped by his searing experiences as a youth in the segregated South and his own activism in those days. “It is one thing to run a campaign and be respectful of everyone’s motives and actions, and it is something else to denigrate those. That bothered me a great deal.”

Clyburn went on to address other things said by the Clinton campaign that seem to be dismissive of the civil rights era.

Mr. Clyburn, reached for a telephone interview Wednesday during an overseas inspection of port facilities, also voiced frustration with former President Clinton, who described Mr. Obama’s campaign narrative as a fairy tale. While Mr. Clinton was not discussing civil rights at the time and seemed to be referring mainly to Mr. Obama’s stance at the Iraq war, Mr. Clyburn saw the remark as a slap at the image of a black candidate running on a theme of unity and optimism.

“To call that dream a fairy tale, which Bill Clinton seemed to be doing, could very well be insulting to some of us,” said Mr. Clyburn, who said he and others took significant risks more than 40 years ago to produce such opportunities for future black Americans.

Allow me to riff on some things I said before. It is bad when when say things that allow your opponent to be thought of as MLK. It is bad when you say things that appear to lessen the contribution of MLK. It is astoundingly stupid to do both. The immediate impact could very well be in the black community, but the impact could go further. I'm white and I found Hillary's comments to be offensive, and my guess is there are other white folks who feel the same way.

But let's focus on the political here and now, which for purposes of this post is the South Carolina primary (which is one week from tomorrow). As noted in the NYT article, Clyburn has a lot of influence in South Carolina.

Mr. Clyburn’s stamp of approval could carry significant last-minute weight given his standing among African-Americans and his deep political connections throughout the state, as well as the role he played in winning the right for South Carolina to have the showdown.

“His influence would be extraordinary if he should endorse somebody,” said Don Fowler, a longtime South Carolina Democratic activist and former national party chairman who is backing Mrs. Clinton.

Let me recap: 50% of Democratic voters in South Carolina are black. Clyburn is the No. 3 Democrat in the House. And while he has not endorsed Obama, he has definitely criticized Hillary--and Bill--for comments that seem to denigrate MLK, Obama, and the civil rights movement. Add all that up and it could mean big trouble for Hillary in South Carolina. Moreover, this could have an effect with black voters beyond South Carolina. It could also affect white voters who have found Hillary's comments offensive.

Of the course, the response from the Hillary campaign has been that she didn't mean to insult anybody, her record shows that, etc. Well, the Hillary camp has done a piss poor job of being convincing in that regard. Hillary could have greatly defused this whole incident by doing something as simple as saying "I apologize for my comments to the extent they could be construed as dismissive of MLK...or hopes and dreams. What I meant was that bringing about change requires people and actions exemplified by both MLK and LBJ." There are other very simple things that could be said to go along with that. As I noted in my first post on this subject, here is what Hillary said:

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. led a movement -- he was gassed, he was beaten, he was jailed – and he gave a speech that was one of the most beautifully, profoundly important speeches ever delivered in America, the "I have a dream" speech.... And then he worked with President Johnson to get the civil rights law passed, because the dream couldn’t be realized until it was legally permissible for people of all races and colors and background to be recognized as citizens.

Is there anything resembling an apology? NO. Any sort of apology would indicate that she made a mistake, and Hillary is never going to do that. Did she say that hopes and dreams are important? NO. She still emphasized the "presidential action" part of the equation.

For the Hillary Kool Aid drinkers out there, let me clarify a few things. The problem is not just what Hillary said initially in the Fox News interview. The problem is what she said afterwards to try to spin her comments, and, more importantly, what she did NOT say and still has not said. Her initial comments, along with what she has done since then, reflect a huge amount of arrogance and stupidity. And that is yet another way in which Hillary Clinton is no different from George W. Bush. In fact, I will opine that even George would have realized ahead of time that statements like Hillary's would be really stupid. The fact that she apparently did not still astonishes me.