Hillary Clinton’s “Assassination” Remark & Why It Matters To Me
Posted 25 May, 2008 at 11:45 pm by Kevin
Filed Under Activism, Politics, Racism, U.S. Studies |
[Update: I've added several more blogger of color reactions below. I post these reactions to show the breadth of thought on the matter from bloggers of color. I don't necessarily agree with everything that is said.
Oh Wait! You mean not all black people and other people of color think alike? That one black blogger doesn't speak for ALL BLACK PEOPLE EVERYWHERE THAT HAVE EVER LIVED, ARE LIVING, AND WILL LIVE?.
Yeah, I know. It's a crazy concept, but it's true.]
I traverse a wide range of blogs, and there’s something that I’ve noticed concerning discussions of Sen. Hillary Clinton and her recent “assassination” remark. At the primarily white blogs, there is much debate over whether or not what she has said is offensive (I won’t bother repeating it here since it’s been posted everywhere) and yet when you look at black bloggers, and other bloggers of color, there is an almost unanimous agreement that her remarks were reprehensible. I also noticed that in the links being provided by blog authors and commentators at the primarily white blogs, to support their agreement or disagreement with the offensiveness of Sen. Clinton’s statements, all are to other primarily white blogs and white bloggers. I find this problematic because I’ve seen a lot of comments on these blogs to the effect of “anyone who thinks that her statement was truly offensive is paranoid, a nut case, delusional, incapable of rational thought, etc,” and this leads me to think that a lot of people just aren’t taking into consideration, let alone even reading and listening to the black and other bloggers of color that Clinton’s statement has affected not only on a political level, but on a deeply personal level.
Let me tell you a story.
As a child, I once came home, after hearing the standard “if you work hard enough, maybe one day you can be President” spiel at school, and quite happily informed my grandmother that all I had to do was work my butt off and maybe one day I could be President of the United States. My grandmoms, not one to harbor any illusions, informed me (this is obviously a paraphrase) that “no black person can become President of the United States. A black person would be killed before white folks would allow that to happen.” True story. Now, as a black woman that grew up in the Jim Crow South, her reasoning was not out of the question. I don’t believe that that’s true today, but from her vantage point, from her life experience, she had every right to believe what she was telling me, and that to tell me this was good advice. This is the context within which I hear Sen. Clinton’s statement. The context of my elders, the generations that came before me. And so while I no longer believe what my grandmoms told me oh so many years ago, I am still influenced and I still reverberate with her experiences and what she tried to teach me based on those experiences.
I was not alive when Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in 1968. Yet, when I hear the words “1968″ and “assassination” in the same sentence, I cannot help but to think of Martin Luther King, Jr. I cannot help but to think of the racial unrest of the period. I cannot help but to think of the struggles that my people have had to undergo in order for a black person to be seriously considered for the Presidency of the United States of America. I cannot help but to think of the numerous civil Rights leaders slain.
This is my history.
And let it be known that this is not solely the history of black folks. People of Color across the board share this history in the United States. We may be invited to the dinner table now and again, but don’t even think we will get anything until the establishment has had their fill.
I don’t think that Sen. Clinton’s statements can be divorced from several events that occurred in 1968:
The assassination of Robert Kennedy.
The Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.
The riots at the Democratic National Convention.
Maybe it’s just me, but when I learned of her remarks (which she has made before, but I was unaware of), that’s what came to mind. It was offensive to the Kennedy family, especially given Ted Kennedy’s illness (Sen. Clinton did apologize for that, however). It unnecessarily brought up the specter of black folks getting killed for being black and standing up for their humanity; and it also, for me at least, brought up the 1968 Democratic Convention riots, given all the talk these days about a “civil war” at the Convention, talk that I’m sure she is aware of.
I can’t say whether or not she intended for me to hear her statements the way I do, but as y’all should know, I’m not one to care much for intention, and that’s how I hear it. I will continue to speak out against sexist attacks against Sen. Clinton, but I will do so because I believe that sexist, racist, classist, disablist, homophobic, et. al. attacks should be condemned under any circumstances; but just as I will speak out against racist attacks against Condoleeza Rice and still never support her politics or career, I will speak out against sexist attacks against Sen. Clinton and still never support her or her career because she is using racist tactics to win an election.
Other Folks of Color on the matter (I’m sure there’s much, much more, so if anyone can point me to other Folks of color’s opinion on this matter, I’d appreciate it and will update the post accordingly):
Pam Spaulding at Pam’s House Blend and Pandagon
African American Political Pundit
Sylvia at Problem Chylde
Liza at CultureKitchen
Lower Manhattanite at Group News Blog here and here
Francis L. Holland. And again here.
Zuky. Also at The Unapologetic Mexican.
Latoya Peterson at Racialiscious
[cross-posted at The Unapologetic Mexican]
Sphere: Related ContentTags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, U.S. Presidential Election 2008
You can follow any comments to this article through the RSS 2.0 feed. Comments are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.
35 Responses to “Hillary Clinton’s “Assassination” Remark & Why It Matters To Me”
-
About
Kevin, aka The Thin Black Duke.
All original content at A Slant Truth is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License . All other content is presumed to be used under the doctrine of fair use and retains its original copyright.
-
Solidarity
Translate
-
Open Source
-
Reading
-
Kick Ass Bloggers
Radical and Progressive Bloggers Kicking Ass Join | List | Previous | Next | Random | Previous 5 | Next 5 | Skip Previous | Skip NextStats
Hillary Clinton’s “Assassination” Remark & Why It Matters To Me…
I traverse a wide range of blogs, and there’s something that I’ve noticed concerning discussions of Sen. Hillary Clinton and her recent “assassination” remark. At the primarily white blogs, there is much debate over whether or not what she has said…
My biggest problem with everything I read on the subject was her intent. Reading so many posts with people saying she did in in order to try to get him killed to be was over the top. But as you said intent is not something you considered in this case.
That it was egregious there is no doubt, that this type of statement under the condition we live in should disqualify her from candidacy ( I have no doubt it will) yes it should, but for me intent or lack there-of was significant. I also don’t think Olberman is anything more at times than a caricature, and I’ve seen him once to often talk about the size of Britney Spears ass to take him as seriously even when he says something I agree with.
I’ve read most of the above posts already. I’ll read the ones I have not read.
@ Cooper - Well, as far as Olberman is concerned, he also “metaphorically” called for Sen. Clinton’s death, so as far as I’m concerned, his outrage means nothing. I’m not feeling him. I also don’t think that Sen. Clinton intentionally is trying to get Obama killed. Nor do I think that she’s staying in the race with the hopes that he will be killed. That’s just nonsense. I do, however, think that there is validity in the outrage expressed over Clinton’s statements.
It seems odd to me that while I can understand how you feel perfectly. I voted for the first time in ‘68.
You don’t seem to understand that after her office being bombed, and five months of media pundits advocating for her death, the possible assasination that seems uppermost on some peoples minds is that of Senator Clinton.
Perhaps I should say the equally possible assasination. I have been deeply concerned with the amount of hate speech expressed by the media during this campaign, and have every expectation that a white male supremacist with a gun will try to kill one or both of them.
I have a hard time understanding why the media pundits advocating her death for the past five months is not a problem, but her mentioning it is.
Hey, thebewilderness.
No, I understand the threat to Sen. Clinton. Believe me, I do. And I condemn those threats to the fullest.
I didn’t mention it in my original post (I probably should have), but you should notice that I take offense to Keith Olberman’s “outrage” in comments for the very reasons you mention.
First let me say,,I am for Hilary,,Obama has no agenda,, He running on nothing more than Corporate Media hype,
Every seems to be caught up in this Barack Obama Magic show. since the media is pushing Hilary out ,, and certain democrats, then 75% to 80% Hilary voter will do what Obama supports said they will do,, Obama support seen on CNN and Msnbc saying if obama don’t win the primary, they are going to vote for McCain, well since then Between certian Democrats and Corporate,,, there already a campaign of Hilary supporter,,
Even if Hilary decide to back Obama, up to 80% of hilary supporter will not vote for Obama or flat out vote for McCain,
I voted for Hilary and no matter what, I will not vote for Obama and better yet, I will not waste my vote, I will vote for McCain, I do think America is ready for a black President, Not Obama, and better yet ,, Obama voter now are saying if you don’t vote for him it Racist, I am not going to Obama because he is a Fraud, No more No Less, Not because he black or white, just because on every single one of his debates He could not answer a hard question for the simple fact they gave them to Hilary,, not only that, everything Hilary said she was going to do, Obama Agreed, with her every single time,, and uses her way on his campaign, Obama needs the other half of Hilary Votes, to win against McCain, and that is a fact, ,,,, Remember if Obama supporter can say they will VOte for McCain if Obama don’t win, then guess what All Hilary voter are uniting and doing the same thing,, what goes around comes around,
“I also noticed that in the links being provided by blog authors and commentators at the primarily white blogs, to support their agreement or disagreement with the offensiveness of Sen. Clinton’s statements, all are to other primarily white blogs and white bloggers.”
Kevin, what an important observation. I see people retreating to their corners in a way that is fundamentally shaking my hope in a brighter future for American race relations.
Kevin, that story you told about your grandmother? I know that one.
Thank you for sharing the personal story told to you by your grandmother. Fundamentally in our country we are still two nations … one for white people … the other for people of color. I hope that Obama can begin to bridge those two nations … and make us whole again.
peace, Villager
[...] A Slant Truth - Hillary Clinton?s ?Assassination? Remark & Why It Matters To Me [...]
YES, YES YES. I’m so thankful you blog…
Kevin,
Great post. I have two posts by Lower Manhattanite to add to your roll of comments on this by people of color:
He wrote about the mostly unspoken, or whispered in families fears way back in January.
http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2008/01/pride-and-palpitations.html
And he was preparing to write on Huckabee’s “joke” at the NRA convention — an incident that should have gotten far more attention than it has, both by the blogs and by the press, imo — when the Clinton remarks made the news. The latter post is here:
http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2008/01/pride-and-palpitations.html
Nora
I appreciate your insight. I recognize that every voter comes to their decision based on the accumulated weight of their own experiences and since the first conversation with a WOC I had after Obama announced was concerning his will, I recognize the risk he takes just being on campaign. I do feel that the media-fed outrage is a different matter from the genuine outrage of the communities affected. I do feel that both candidates have been under considerable risk and considering the media-fed vitriol against Clinton, probably equal risk at this point and that needs to be considered in looking at her statement.
[...] In the interest of looking at the issue closer, Slant Truth has noticed there’s a divide on how this is seen in primarily white blogs vs primarily black [...]
Kevin, Sylvia has something up. As does Liza at CultureKitchen. I hope I did those right.
I believe that Sen. Clinton meant her remark exactly the way I took it, that she was talking about June and not thinking at all about assassination. I believe she was not thinking about assassination because of her white privilege just as it was my white privilege that heard her. I believe that there are assassination threats for Senator Clinton, but growing up white means that she is not used to automatically thinking of it as a possibility (at least outside the home) the way that people of color automatically think of it as part of public life. I’m glad she apologized and I’m glad that my blindness has been once again brought to my attention. I really didn’t get it at all for quite a while. It seems like the only progress I’ve been able to make so far is to own my ignorance.
Her remarks couldn’t be divorced from the context of 1968? What a ridiculous thing to say. Could they be divorced from the context of 1996, the other year she mentioned?
Could they be divorced from the context when she first made a similar remark, in March, and NO ONE even batted an eye?
This is such a transparent attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill that it boggles the mind. But please, continue to over-parse and cherry pick her remarks so that they suit the agenda you are trying to promote, that she is racist, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. Why stop now?
thanks, Kevin.
There was never any doubt in my mind that it was offensive; I’m sort of boggled that people even -argue- about this, really.
“People were offended: ergo, -it’s fucking offensive.-”
still, in general, you would think that somewhere between “Well, -I’m- not offended, therefore it isn’t offensive, you’re just haters, QED” and–yeah, I did actually see a few of these, although not nearly as many as some seem to be making it out–ZOMG SHE WANTS HIM DEAD!!!ELEVEN BURN THE WITCH DIE HELLARY DIE…there ought to be, y’know, something.
which actually, there mostly is, and a lot of people do seem to be reading other peoples’ saying “You know, that was a really stupid and fucked up thing to say, wtf, Hillary, really?” as BURN THE WITCH.
…um, people, if she wasn’t thinking about 1968 and assassination, then one would think -she wouldn’t have actually mentioned ‘1968′ and ‘assassination’ in so many words-,” neh?
Kevin: for the update, there’s also Vanessa’s post here:
http://pluckypunk.blogspot.com/2008/05/and-more-on-that-1968-thing.htm l
@Villager: So do I, Villager. So do I.
@Carmen D.: Yeah, I see it too, and it is frightening to me. We have to keep or chins up, though.
@elle: I suspect a lot of black folk know that one. And yes, you did the hyperlinks correctly.
@Nora Carrington: Thanks for the links, Nora.
@Dan: No, they can’t be divorced from the context of 1996. I don’t recall anything as traumatizing as what happened in 1968 happening then, so what’s your point? And what Belle said.
Where exactly did I call Cllinton a capital-R racist? I believe I wrote that she was using racist tactics. Not the same thing.
Really Dan, I’ve lived my entire life hearing people tell myself and other women and men of all colors that our concerns are nothing more than making “a mountain out of a molehill.” It’s gotten really damn tiring. Could you please take that shit somewhere else?
You can throw me in there.
She was talking about HERSELF. Comparing HERSELF to RFK.
SHE is being hounded and told to quit. SHE has had death and assasination threats. SHE lives in a country where women are routinely beaten and killed for being uppity at a far greater rate than any men are now and through history. SHE was in her formative years when the *white* RFK was killed, SHE has Kennedys on her mind because Ted is in hospital. She apologised to the Kennedys after for that very reason.
HOW IS THIS ABOUT OBAMA ?
Clinton knew exactly what she was doing. The only question is whether it was planned in advance or whether she ’seized the moment’ thinking it would be another good opportunity -being videotaped and thus presumably to be replayed for local upcoming primary voters - to throw out the assassination thing again.
RFK’s assassination occurred during a victory speech after he won a June 4th primary (a few minutes after midnight, thus technically on June 5th). Obama is set to acquire his own victory on exactly the same date in June, as June 4th is supposed to be the day that the remaining superdels commit to him after the last of the primaries on June 3rd. Clinton has gone full-tilt with inflammatory rhetoric designed to stir up latent race/class hatreds ever since the long run-up to the Pa primary. She made the first assassination reference in March and the last one on Friday, 5/23.
For those like the writer who share age, race, sex
and profession with Clinton, and who grew up in
the days of segregation, it doesn’t take a rocket
scientist to understand the gravity of what she’s
done. It was absolutely unforgivable.
She’s deliberately unleashed a genie that can never be forced back into the box even if she wished to do so. And I perceive ZERO indication that she ever believes she is ‘in the wrong’, sorry only that her strategy backfired on her. This is a woman whose level of reckless disregard for the rest of humanity makes her unfit to serve in any office of government, at any time, EVER.
First, that comparison fails utterly, for reasons explained here.
Second, I do not recall seeing a similar photo to this of Senator Clinton. Do you?
I’m with Not of Color and Old Enough to Remember–this wasn’t an accident. As Olbermann points out, she’d said it before, and then apparently been warned off saying it again for a couple months, and then returned to saying it again the other day. This was no spur-of-the-moment, off-the-cuff misstep.
So perhaps you understand my skepticism that her remark has anything to do with anyone BUT Obama.
I think some feminist partisans have lost their natural minds. They’re confusing being a Democrat with being a citizen. This isn’t about the Democratic party. This is about America. You’re entitled to think that your party owes Hillary whatever it is that you think she deserves, but American voters don’t owe any candidate squat. They owe us their service. Remember service, and earning the privilege of leading? Screwing over Black Americans of every description in order to get what you feel your party owes you, or in order to protest NOT getting what you feel entitled to, is pretty much the opposite of earning the privilege of leading.
@Malik: You have been thrown in.
@bran: I won’t bother responding to you because Ilyka has done a good enough job already.
Hey, thanks for the link. And yes, it has been frustrating to have this incident handwaved away (or even talked about as a smear against Clinton) all over the white, mainstream internet.
[...] It began in earnest when I read Kevin’s response at Slant Truth, in which he stated that regardless of her intent, it was his personal associations of the assassinations of black leaders th… He added that he was further troubled by the racially segregated - and polarized - link networks he [...]
[...] if you can’t see that no one feels exactly “consoled” about this–”worried,” “excited, apprehensive,” “guardedly hopeful” might be nearer right, [...]
[...] lusting for the assassination of her opponent, Barack Obama. (That is not to suggest there were no legitimate concerns about her statement.) And Randi Rhodes - a “progressive talk radio personality” - fresh [...]