But then Clinton came back and, far less artfully, said that King's visions
were great, but it took an experienced politician like Lyndon Johnson to get
them enacted. At the very least, Clinton had equated the sometimes crass master
of the legislative backroom with one of America's patron saints. (The real
problem is that Clinton seemed to put LBJ on a pedestal higher than King's.)
That was probably not her intention, but neither was this her best example in
the deeds - not - words crusade she was on. In any case, at that point, things
began to unravel.
All Hillary had to do was to say that it was Martin Luther King's vision which allowed LBJ to pass the Civil Rights Bill. This was an an example of one man being able to push Washington into changing the status quo.
I guess Hillary wants to be an agent of change like LBJ but without Iraq turning into post-American-involvement Vietnam with its 100,000+ people slaughtered. She should have just not compared LBJs role in passing the Civil Rights Bill (which was very important) with ML King who actually became a martyr to see the thing pass. I think dying for the cause should be seen as a bigger accomplishment then simply bullying a bunch of Senators in a cloakroom.
Actually, Hillary should have just avoided the issue all-together since race is one of those issues that the Dems have a hard time dealing with. For instance that Jena 6 thing immediately sucked Obama into its web but the GOP pretty much got a pass on the whole thing. The Race War seems to be one of those battles that the Dems seem to be continuously fighting but never has a real winner.
No comments:
Post a Comment