January 28, 2008
Obama's Hollow Victory
By
Patrick J. Buchanan
Barack Obama routed Hillary Clinton two
to one in the heaviest turnout in a Democratic primary
in the history of South Carolina. Such a defeat would
normally be a crushing and perhaps fatal blow to a
rival's campaign. Bill and Hillary laughed it off.
Indeed, even before the voting had
ended, Bill Clinton had tarnished and diminished
Barack's victory. Responding to an unrelated
question, he volunteered that Jesse Jackson won South
Carolina twice in the 1980s.[
A Former President, Back in the Thick of Politics,
by Katharine Q. Seelye, New York Times, January
27, 2008]
This is an
Arkansan way of saying black candidates always
do well when there is a
large black bloc vote, as in the Deep South, but no
one should take this seriously. By introducing Jackson
and earlier saying the Palmetto State contest would be
about gender and race, Clinton set the media to looking
beyond Barack's total vote to its racial composition.
And,
sure enough, when the final returns came in, Barack
had won 78 percent of the
black vote, and lost 76 percent of
the white vote.
Thus, Barack's victory instantly raised
a question in the minds of pundits and politicians. Can
Democrats nominate a black candidate who cannot win a
fourth of the white vote in a landslide victory in a
Democratic primary in South Carolina?
Would nominating such a candidate cede
all 11 states of the
Old Confederacy to the GOP and imperil Democratic
candidates all the way down the ticket? In truth, it
would.
The anger and bristling defiance of the
Clintons in his victory speech suggests that Obama knows
what has been done to him and is being done to him, and
knows there is little he can do about it.
Indeed, his victory speech was
sandwiched by cable TV between a speech by Bill from
Missouri and a town hall meeting with Hillary from
Tennessee in which both congratulated Barack as though
he had just won a friendly round of golf. Their smiles
and laughter said more than their words that Barack's
victory was a big nothing-burger.
Both Clintons, in their non-concession
concession speeches, looked ahead confidently not only
to Feb. 5, when half the nation goes to the polls, but
to Florida, which is today.
What was this all about, as Hillary and
Obama agreed not to campaign in Florida and no delegates
will be chosen, as the state is being sanctioned by the
party for getting out of line in the primary process?
Seems the Clintons have been
clandestinely working Florida, so that, after the South
Carolina setback, they can get big headlines by winning
the largest state yet to vote. This could instantly
cancel out Barack's momentum from South Carolina and
create Clinton momentum for the seven days before Super
Tuesday.
It's bending the rules perhaps, but
tactically brilliant, assuming they win. And, according
to The New York Times, by the Friday before the
Florida primary, some 400,000 Floridian Democrats had
already voted.
Bill and Hillary are being accused of
the politics of divisiveness and playing the race card.
But while the former president may have behaved in a
most unpresidential way, he is doing for his wife
nothing Bobby Kennedy—"Ruthless
Robert," as he was then known—would not and did
not do for his brother and Old Joe Kennedy, who is
said to have
bought the West Virginia primary, did not do for his
son.
Feb. 5 seems certain to be do-or-die day
for Barack Obama. As of this writing, he has more votes
than Hillary and more delegates, but has been made to
pay a huge price for his success.
He has been
converted by the Clintons, their surrogates and a
media that the Clintons have
played like a Stradivarius from the Barack who
carried white Iowa into
The Black Candidate.
There is nothing the Clintons and their
surrogates have said that is overtly racist. From
raising the drug issue, to calling Barack's rendition of
his record on Iraq a "fairy tale," to contending
that, while
Dr. Martin Luther King was an inspirational leader,
LBJ
got the job done, to saying South Carolinians will
vote on gender and race, to raising the Jesse Jackson
comparison, all the points the Clintons have made are
valid.
It is the media's obsession with race
that has done the job for the Clintons in marginalizing
Obama and given him the high hurdles he faces on Feb. 5.
The problem for Barack is this: If, on
Super Tuesday, he wins again the same 78 percent of the
black vote he won in South Carolina, while losing the 76
percent of the white vole he lost, and loses that
two-thirds of the Hispanic vote he lost in Nevada, he
could be wiped out.
Indeed, polls show his Hispanic vote
shrinking further and faster than his white vote, his
"Yes, we can" ("Si, se puede") refrains
notwithstanding.
January raises a long-term question. If
an African-American with as great a cross-racial appeal
as Obama had in Iowa can be so easily ghettoized in
three weeks to where whites and Hispanics, the fastest
growing minority in America, recoil, when if ever can a
black American be nominated or elected president?
Is Bill Clinton not only "our first
black president," but our last?
Patrick J. Buchanan
needs
no introduction
to VDARE.COM readers; his book
State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and
Conquest of America,
can be ordered from Amazon.com. His new book
is
Day of Reckoning: How
Hubris, Ideology, and Greed Are Tearing America Apart.