Clinton, Obama Call a Truce, Rangel Calls Obama "Stupid"

After the national debate about race turned into the national debate about how race discussed in the Democratic presidential campaign, Senators and Democratic rivals Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have declared a truce. The stir was caused by Clinton's remarks about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s efforts ("Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act...It took a president to get it done.") and when Obama criticized Clinton for belittling King's achievements...which then lead to Clinton accusing Obama of making mountains of molehills.

Yesterday, the Clinton and Obama camps issued statements like ""Our party and our nation is bigger than this" (Clinton) and "We share the same goals, we are all Democrats, we all believe in civil rights, we all believe in equal rights" (Obama). But Representative Charles Rangel decided to weigh in and told NY1's Dominic Carter:

"How race got into this thing is because Obama said ‘race.' But there is nothing that Hillary Clinton has said that baffles me. I would challenge anybody to belittle the contribution that Dr. King has made to the world, to our country, to civil rights, and the Voting Rights Act. But for [Obama] to suggest that Dr. King could have signed that act is absolutely stupid. It's absolutely dumb to infer that Doctor King, alone, passed the legislation and signed it into law."

According to the NY Times, "A Clinton adviser said Mr. Rangel was speaking for himself." Of course. And, of course, Obama himself wondered, "For [the Clinton camp] to somehow suggest that we're interjecting race as a consequence of a statement she made, that we haven't commented on, is pretty hard to figure out."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Chung in News on January 15, 2008 2:20 PM

Comments [rss]

nik13

When you build a party on identity politics, expect that to happen.

If we don't vote for Obama, we're racist. If we don't vote for HRC, we're sexist. If we don't vote for Edwards, we're homophobes. If we don't vote for Kucinich, we discriminate against midgets, etc.

VanessaNYC

P.S. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/13/574170.aspx

VanessaNYC

Obama actually never criticized Hillary for her comments on MLK. The MEDIA criticized Hillary and the Clinton campaign pointed its finger at Obama.

Obama has been staying away from this kind of bickering. It's really ridiculous.

Yes, I'm voting for Obama in 08.

matthew gannon

Anyone notice that Hillary had African Americans campaigning for her before the race issue came up?

I hope all of these Democrats bickering about semantics don't inflict 4 years of McCain on us.

glennQNYC

Anyone else notice Clinton Inc. launch into damage control mode by quickly surrounding her with African Americans?

Anyone but Hillary will get my vote...

freddyhere

Have you noticed how numerous black leaders and talking heads have been showing their "hate" for Obama? That's so typical, no?

matthew gannon

I guess I'm gonna risk being lumped in with Rangel for this...

If someone (Obama?) thinks Hillary is belittling MLK, then stupid is an appropriate description.

jammer

eh, still see that this libelous, inaccurate headline is still posted.

Toby von Meistersinger

They all sound like sixth graders in the lunchroom instead of people who are engaged in political discourse. How hard would it have been to find competent people who don't sound like a bunch of middle schoolers to do little things like run countries?

In times of old things were settled on the Weehawken Dueling Ground in the form of a Hamilton-Burr style debate. Perhaps they had something then.

zodak

"For Rangel to say that Obama's suggestion is 'stupid' is absolutely moronic. It's absolutely idiotic to infer that Rangel isn't in Clinton's pocket."

Tgirl

I believe that Rangel heavily insinuated that Obama was not only stupid, but "absulutly dumb" as well.

(am I still under oath?)

jammer

um, how inflammatory can you be, gothamist? Charles Rangel did NOT call Obama stupid. God, get your damned facts straight!

bklynd

"Feeding the cat was stupid"

"You were stupid to feed the cat"

Both are the same. But neither is the same as "you are a stupid person" in the more general sense. I think most people would agree that they are occasionally stupid.

EastRiver

The "establishment" is really pouring it on to ensure a Clinton victory. Hillary Clinton is going to owe so many favors to so many people that we should expect four more years of nothing.

jibbly

Politburo I think the example you gave is not the same as what jaycjay said.

One can pinpoint a specific action of a person: "You were stupid to feed the cat."

OTOH, one can make a blanket statement about the person: "You are stupid and you fed the cat."

At least that's how I look at it.

Tgirl

is this stupid?

that all depends on what the definition of "is" is!

JRod5417

This IS stupid! For the Democrats sake, the candidates should stop turning every issue into a discussion about racism. It will only hurt them regardless of whether the nominee is Obama or Clinton.

JRod5417

This IS stupid! For the Democrats sake, the candidates should stop turning every issue into a discussion about racism. It will only hurt them regardless of whether the nominee is Obama or Clinton.

Politburo

"To say that someone said a "stupid" thing is not the same thing as saying that a person "is stupid.""

I see people using this dodge all the time, and I just can't agree. If you classify someone's action or words as "stupid", you are saying that that person is stupid. Look at it this way:

"Feeding the cat was stupid"

"You were stupid to feed the cat"

Both statements have the same meaning, no?

Outter Burrougher

babyhitler, one problem is that there are people who are very sincerely making that argument. another problem is that there are people (read: Gloria Steinem) who are very sincerely who are arguing something very similar substituting "Clinton" for "Obama" and "sexist" for "racist".