Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, LBJ, and a Few Empty Words

It's obviously in the self-interest of Mr. Obama and his friends to mollify people who supported Hillary Clinton, but a few conciliatory words with the obvious purpose of attracting votes may not be sufficient.

Mr. Obama and his brutal campaign machine vilified Hillary Clinton as a racist again and again and again during the campaign... for example, when she mentioned that Lyndon Johnson deserved some credit for passing the Voting and Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965.

Assigning LBJ a little credit for that monumental legislation is actually a fantastic understatement of the reality of the situation. Johnson was one of the greatest Senate Majority Leaders in the history of the Senate, before he became Vice-President, and without his enormous legislative skill and the commitment behind it, Jim Crow could have easily survived for another generation in the South.

For Obama's friends who may not be familiar with LBJ's Great Society programs and what they accomplished, there's a very good summary by Joseph Califano, Jimmy Carter's Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare:

Since 1965 the federal government has provided more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in 86 million college loans to 29 million students, and more than $14 billion in work-study awards to 6 million students. Today nearly 60 percent of full-time undergraduate students receive federal financial aid under Great Society programs and their progeny.

When these programs were enacted, only 41 percent of Americans had completed high school; only 8 percent held college degrees. This past year, more than 81 percent had finished high school and 24 percent had completed college.

Head Start, which has served more than 16 million preschoolers in just about every city and county in the nation and today serves 800,000 children a year, is as American as motherhood and apple pie. Like so many successes, this preschool program has a thousand parents. But how many people remember the battles over Head Start? Conservatives opposed such early childhood education as an attempt by government to interfere with parental control of their children. In the '60s those were code words to conjure up images of Soviet Russia wrenching children from their homes to convert them to atheistic communism. But Lyndon Johnson knew that the rich had kindergartens and nursery schools; and he asked, why not the same benefits for the poor?

In the entire treasury of Great Society measures, the jewel Lyndon Johnson believed would have the greatest value was the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That law opened the way for black Americans to strengthen their voice at every level of government. In 1964 there were 79 black elected officials in the South and 300 in the entire nation. By 1998, there were some 9,000 elected black officials across the nation, including 6,000 in the South. In 1965 there were five black members of the House; today there are 39.

Great Society contributions to racial equality were not only civic and political. In 1960, black life expectancy was 63.6 years, not even long enough to benefit from the Social Security taxes that black citizens paid during their working lives. By 1997, black life expectancy was 71.2 years, thanks almost entirely to Medicaid, community health centers, job training, food stamps, and other Great Society programs. In 1960, the infant mortality rate for blacks was 44.3 for each 1,000 live births; in 1997, that rate had plummeted by two-thirds, to 14.7. In 1960, only 20 percent of blacks completed high school and only 3 percent finished college; in 1997, 75 percent completed high school and more than 13 percent earned college degrees.

Obama and his surrogates not only completely disrespected one of the best friends that black people and every other disadvantaged minority in the United States ever had... They used Hillary Clinton's acknowledgement of LBJ's role to attack her as a racist.

Empty words won't wash away the Obama campaign's miserable race-baiting, any more than a lukewarm apology can be sufficient compensation for any other form of brutal assault.

If Mr. Obama really wants to unify the party, it's time for him to make a substantial concession to Hillary Clinton and the people who supported her, and I can't imagine what form such a concession could assume except for offering her the Vice-Presidency.

__________________________

http://jacobfreeze.com

I wish society was more

I wish society was more evolved in their thinking. However, since the issue of sexism and racism just doesn't seem to go away so we can all move on to beat McCain, I'd like to point out something else President Johnson said when he signed the Civil Rights Act. He said that racism was going make a lot more Republicans. I was in the South and was true and terrible. I certainly hope history isn't going to repeat itself again.

Also, I would love to congratulate the younger voters of today who are gender and race blind. We have President Johnson to help thank for that progressiveness.

I agree with all of your

I agree with all of your points concerning LBJ, but it must also be pointed out that, I believe, Great Society plans had their beginnings and organization under Kennedy. Of course, that doesn't interfere with any of your points.

Do you really believe an Obama-Clinton ticket is best for the party? I personally believe that a position such as Senate majority leader or even just a prominence like that of Ted Kennedy in the Senate would better serve the country. That way, she could present and hopefully carry out her ideas more effectively, as she wouldn't be trying to do so from under Obama's shadow as vice-president. A cabinet post, anything to keep her going is necessary. For the sake of progressiveness in the arena of health care and others, Hillary Clinton must have a prominent post, but I don't believe vice-president is that position. What are your thoughts?

__________________________

"You say you want a revolution; well, you know, we'd all love to change the world"

At this point, I'd like to

At this point, I'd like to see a McCain/Clinton ticket, as absurd and impossible as such a thing may be. At least it would be a change from watching the con-man Obama play out his little games in the current media landscape.

The only sure thing about Obama is that he isn't what he appears to be... which is to say, he isn't what he appears to be to people whose baseline of reality is television.

What do American voters have to think with? How can they judge the distant figures they observe on the national stage? Most of them have never met a Washington politician even at the level of the House of Representatives, and they never will. Most of them have never met a mayor. So they think with television, insofar as they think about politicians at all.

Obama has made himself for television, and he isn't much different from all the other TV products: smooth, shallow, and manipulative.

The internet has encouraged all sorts of semi-educated and inexperienced people to express themselves about manufactured "issues," and they react to the political scene almost as simply as paramecia swimming around in a Petri dish... If the sugar concentration is higher over there, they swim that way.

Yes We Can! Yes We Can! YES WE CAN!

Doesn't that sound sweet?

__________________________

http://jacobfreeze.com

But the truth is that's what

But the truth is that's what grassroots politics is. The uneducated and politically inexperienced taking a stand on issues when they see a problem. That's what grassroots politics was back when it was praised under Andrew Jackson, and that's what it is today. True, Barack Obama is a true grassroots candidate, and has recognized that and has tailored himself to fit that bill--it's true, no denying it. He has adapted to the media, which I know you have a problem with, and maybe justifiably so, but a little optimism never hurts. Maybe if enough paramecia swim into the Petri Dish of Universal Health Care, there will be an effect in the form of a progressive response from a candidate who so clearly has his house built on the rock of grassroots politics.

__________________________

"You say you want a revolution; well, you know, we'd all love to change the world"

I love the idea of Obama as

I love the idea of Obama as a "grassroots" politician like Andrew Jackson!

Andrew Jackson won his "grassroots" popularity by perpetrating a racist Holocaust against the Creek nations in Florida, and redistributing their land almost for free to white settlers. He continued the same policy as President with the destruction of the Cherokee nation in North Carolina.

His immediate legacy was the nationwide depression of 1837, produced by a weirdly erratic fiscal policy that violently contracted the supply of precious metals and made paper money worthless.

Maybe Obama should wait until after the election to embrace the Jacksonian principles of genocide and economic disaster. There's probably more snake-oil in this particular brew than even an absolutely unscrupulous salesman like Obama can peddle to the American public in one campaign.

__________________________

http://jacobfreeze.com

So if you believe grassroots

So if you believe grassroots politics and government by the people results in legacies marred by genocide and economic disaster, what exactly is your solution? Exclusive government by the highly educated, government by, say, elitists? Grassroots politics is how "change" happens in America, for better or for worse. It's the only way Obama is going to be able to deliver on his whole "change" platform--a platform that, I'm sure, doesn't include genocide and economic ruin. In fact, I think, in their places are the issues of health care and leaving Iraq. So if Obama won his grassroots popularity by offering prospective solutions to these problems, how can that be a bad thing? We know they will at least be given a chance to work.

__________________________

"You say you want a revolution; well, you know, we'd all love to change the world"

I address exactly the

I address exactly the shifting line between populism and elitism in the diatribe I just posted on Diatribune, and we might as well continue this discussion on a new thread, if you're still interested.

I appreciate the way you maintain a civil level of discourse even though we disagree about Obama, and you inspired me to rethink Andrew Jackson's career for the first time in a long time.

This sort of exchange is virtually impossible on most websites devoted to political discussion, and I hope we can keep it going.

__________________________

http://jacobfreeze.com

I'd like her some place

I'd like her some place where she can get equal pay for women!

I think that place is the

I think that place is the White House, if it's anywhere, and in spite of many protestations to the contrary, I think the primary campaign demonstrated that sexism is still alive and well in the political establishment of the United States.

We have de jure equality, and de facto discrimination against women, and it may even be getting worse instead of better.

__________________________

http://jacobfreeze.com

"We have de jure equality,

"We have de jure equality, and de facto discrimination against women, and it may even be getting worse instead of better".

I believe that is a fair statement of the facts. Now, I'd like to add that I also believe that many women are doing it to themselves. They "sex it up" instead of "braining" themselves up. And then they wonder why they are sex symbols instead of intelligence equals. I swear there really is a lack of common sense going around.

It wasn't because Hillary

It wasn't because Hillary Clinton "sexed it up" that the mainstream media and the political establishment launched an unprecedented onslaught to force her out of contention for the Presidency.

Why was it so important for Hillary Clinton to concede to Barack Obama? Timing was relatively insignificant in every other race for the nomination, and candidates dropped out when they ran out of money or their vote-count fell into single digits.

Now we have an electorate more polarized by race and gender than anyone imagined it could possibly be, only six months ago, and now Barack Obama decides it's the right time to insult Hillary Clinton by hiring Patti Solis Doyle.

Maybe the Obamabots think they can scare the rest of us into voting for their hypocritical Messiah Barack Obama, by threatening us with the bogey-man John McCain, but it may not work.

__________________________

http://jacobfreeze.com

"Why was it so important for

"Why was it so important for Hillary Clinton to concede to Barack Obama"? It's just my opinion but it seems to me that by "suspending" her campaign instead of conceding the Democration nomination process just has her hand on the knife into Obamas back. After all, "things can change". And yes, they certainly can. The woman is no fool. Like I said, don't count her out, she is very, very clever. She is still eligible for nomination at the convention by "suspending". And, in the other hand she has it holding out to Obama to pay off her $22.5 million debt. And that's not counting the attorney fees for the vendors hauling her into small claims courts to get her to pay up. Oh yes, those blue collar and union workers that she claims to own are hauling her into court for unpaid services. She'll still win. Obama will pay her bills while she keeps twisting the knife in Obama. Do not count her out of her potentially great run for the Presidency in the future. Maybe the damn MSM will have learned some political correctnessness about sexism by them. She has the greatest potential to win - just not yet.