Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., discussing tactical decisions and responses within the civil rights movement. Full video of this interview at left.
Today is Dr. King’s birthday — his actual birthday, and not the weekend extender of officialdom. And while Dr. King’s civil rights work gets well-deserved attention, his abilities as a tactician don’t get nearly enough praise.
With the kerfuffle over race/gender issues being repeated by media outlets coast to coast, it’s worth saying that tactics are not just the province of elected leaders. Self-appointed purveyors of truthiness can also employ some sharp elbows and greasy skids to help along their own, self-absorbed cause.
In that context, it’s clear that Clinton’s comment had nothing to do with race. Clinton was trying, counter-intuitively and perhaps a bit desperately, to highlight the unsung benefits of her being a “Washington insider”: to argue that, pragmatically, being on the inside of politics-as-usual would actually help her to get things done were she to become president. Just as it takes a village to raise a child, Clinton seemed to be saying, it takes a politician to make a law. It wasn’t about black-vs-white; it wasn’t even about rhetoric-vs-action (no one disputes that Dr. King brought much, much more than mere rhetoric to the Civil Rights movement); it was about insider-vs-outsider, experienced-vs-inexperienced. It wasn’t about Obama’s being black; it was about his being green.
Which is not to defend what Clinton said. We live in a sound-bite world, one that doesn’t generally appreciate or care to analyze the often painfully precise lines of her logic. She should have known how such a point might have been heard. Obama’s description of Clinton’s comment to Garrett was the right one: it was “ill-advised.”
I’ll say, especially when the "Garrett" in question is Fox News’ Major Garrett, who rushed to his "blog" to spin the response to ensure ratings gold maximum controversy. Again, via CJR:
A source many of the mainstream sites linked to in their initial coverage of Hillary’s MLK comment was Fox News’s Major Garrett’s Blog—The Bourbon Room, it’s called—in which he trumpets his interview with Clinton and, in so doing, incorrectly characterizes her treatment of Dr. King…
And from Major Garrett it predictibly goes outward through the Politico and into the "everyone’s talking about it" vicious ratings-grubbing pack of media hyenas, who then proceed to call every surrogate with a big mouth that they know to fan the flames of the story that keeps on giving. And giving.
I hate to belabor a hopefully dead topic given the supposed detente between the presidential campaigns, but this needs amplification: the media has been turning up the heat on this pot until it’s publicly boiled over. CJR characterizes it like the game of telephone that kids play when they are nine. I’d say that’s about right.
Meanwhile, there are a lot of problems that real Americans would like to see tackled. Wouldn’t it be great to see all of the Democratic candidates turn the tables tonight on Tim Russert and Brian Williams, moderating tonight’s Dem debate in Nevada? (Yeah, I don’t know why either given their prior abysmal performance.) What if all of the candidates talked to each other not just about where they differ on issues and solutions, but also where they all stand strong together (H/T Digby) — on solid Democratic principles, fighting for the folks who need a voice, lifting up those who need a hand — and tell Tim and Brian to stuff it in their privileged classes.
Now THAT would be some great teevee. And a tactic that Dr. King might get a chuckle out of on his birthday.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Happy happy Birthday MLK!!
What’s the best biography of MLK, if one were to read only one?
I suppose if MLK were alive today (and he is alive, just not here), I am sure there would be a parsing of every word he would say. I love to listen to him and wish so much that anyone out in the world who has the opportunity to have a microphone would be able to hold a candle to him.
Interestingly, I think JRE made a similar comment to this: “It seems to me that it is both historically and sociologically true that privileged classes do not give up their privileges voluntarily. And they do not give them up without strong resistance.”
Did he say something like, “We have to take them away?”
Dr. King would never have stood for all the crap that is going on in this country. He would have mobilized people to take to the streets and they would have. He is missed greatly.
Hi, Christy, Esq!
Seems to me Clinton’s problem could have been avoided by boycotting FOX.
MLK is my hero. Every year, I think moreso.
Interesting theory from Randi Rhodes. The racism / sexist “debate” didn’t exist until Karl Rove wrote about it in his column last week in the WSJ. Guess he’s still pulling the media’s strings.
Wouldn’t it be great to see all of the Democratic candidates turn the tables tonight on Tim Russert and Brian Williams…
Can we make the theme “Seven Long Years of Republican Failures”?
Pretty please?
Sweet, Redd has her dander up just a bit too,
“vicious ratings-grubbing pack of media hyenas”
Yer getting good at this.
It struck me anew, reading your quote at the top from MLK, that this is exactly what John Edwards has been saying: the privileged classes won’t give up their privileges without a struggle. How little we really seem to have advanced.
Better… *g*
It is hard to ignore the woman/race issue this year. And no doubt, No Doubt, KKKarl knows it and wants to do whatever he can to push it. What would be terrible is if the Demos allow themselves to fall into a trap and not find the way to move past it. Clearly, this is an issue of the ages in our land, and this year, well, fester, meet sore.
TPM is covering the conduct of the Clintons in the Michigan primary and Don Riegel’s criticism of the Clintons, to paraphrase: they do not care how they win, only that they do. Note as well how the Clintons sought to keep their fairy tale story up front for as long as possible.
Excellent point, Christy. I fear the “truce” is more flash than substance, but not letting the playground fight narrative take over would be admirable. The media loves a good circular firing squad. Lets them feel superior and advertise the blow-hard, blow-dried commentary programming which cannot run on anything but hyperbolic conflict. It is very much like the commentary on sports events: one anchor re-describes what you just saw in ways that anyone who knows the game really doesn’t need and anyone who doesn’t know the game does not understand. The other anchor spins our tales of strength and weakness, threats and consequences, sounding dire warnings forgotten the nanosecond they are disproved. Everyone is self-satisfied, bathed in a glowing aura of inarguable importance.
That would be so wonderful, Christy, if they addressed the democratic brand tonight.
Evening all. Just finishing dinner here (scampi) and getting ready to pop The Peanut into bed shortly. How is everyone this evening?
Thank you Christy for posting this video. I love hearing MLK’s voice.
I’m not a Hillary supporter, but what if she was trying to say that if she becomes president, she too would help the movement? Maybe that is what she meant by her remark. I don’t know, of course.
It would, wouldn’t it? It’s an opportunity I’d love to see them all take, I’m just not certain it’s possible in such a competitive environment in the middle of a campaign like this.
still working on a brief. But I thank you and FDL.
Kay — if you click through the CJR link, they give some great background and context on the comment.
Maybe Taylor Branch’s books. The link is to the last of the trilogy. I must admit I haven’t read them yet, but have heard some good things.
hurl — I think the sportscaster versus your own eyes analogy is really apt here. When Jane was in Iowa, often she would be at an event and describe it and her on the spot bit would be very different from what other reporters would say. And far too often, you could pick up so much spin and innuendo in the media reports, especially in who they would choose to call for counter-spin quotes.
That Major Garrett is a majorly factless on a regular basis
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..80698.html
He was pretty craptastic during the California recall as well.
Oh okay. Ooospie. :-)
Not a biography, but I love MLK’s Letters from a Birmingham Jail.
Pat Buchanan is preaching a scorched earth policy and Edwards should lead the charge, on Tweety’s show…!
Don’t mean to be impolite by going a little O/T, but I saw this issue-closing Editorial in U.S. News & World Report in a waiting room today and was incensed enough to tear it out without being caught by The Receptionist from ‘Strictness is Better’. Anyway, it’s related to what we keep talking about.
OK, who can spot the fallacy?
With more arrows embedded in the nation’s flesh, it says, “Hey, now the first one doesn’t feel so bad!”
There follow one and 2/3 columns about the candidates. For extra points: How many times is John Edwards’ name mentioned? a. 8 b. 4 c. 2 d. 1 e. None of the above.
This is Germany was known as (spelling optional) Volksverdummung — ‘making the people dumber’. This is carefully formulated to make the reader certain that the truth cannot be determined, for one thing, and that no exercise of memory is ever called for.
When did Bush’s approval rating go down, for instance? WELL BEFORE the primary season. It wasn’t the campaigning that told the country it is on the wrong track. It started long before, and it was the Executive Branch and their enablers in the other branches which brought it about. How about writing your editorial about THAT, Mr. Zuckerman?
This is just like “Kerry insulted the troops”, when what he was doing was insulting the intelligence of Bush. In both instances, it is willful misunderstanding of what was intended engaged in by those who stand to benefit from promulgating that misunderstanding.
Kerry, to his own detriment, “apologized to the troops”, instead of holding to what was clearly the meaning of his joke, thereby handing the willful misunderstanders an unmitigated rhetorical and political victory.
Did Clinton “apologize” for her statement, or has she stood by its clear meaning? (I’m not very up-to-date on this kerfuffle.)
Pardon me while I ponder his motivations…and Tweety’s.
Thanks, but that seem to cover only 3 years and I am looking for a single book covering all of MLK’s life, just because I know, with all the other books stacked up, that I won’t read more than one.
Hope my question gets asked in tonight’s debate:
KO up on MSNBC. I feel sorry for him having to work with Tweedy when the debate starts later.
Hmmm, you may be correct. Interesting observation.
Hi, Christy. It’s good to see you in the evening.
Absolutely.
Let’s see…blood sport metaphors delivered by Buchanan…Chris “The Spitter” Matthews and his all-white-middle-ageing-fast male castrati chorus pontificating about race and gender politics.
Nope. No irony there….
I’ve heard good things about Taylor Branch’s work.
I am close to someone who was a close confidant of the Clintons and a Bill Clinton appointee to a somewhat prominent post, and who is a racial minority. This person related to me that the Clintons definitely played the angle of privately, or obliquely, assuring racial minority supporters that they would receive the kinds of policies they wanted, even if they didn’t openly campaign on those policies.
This would be consistent with your speculation.
Not Dr King but a really good book about that era is Rep. John Lewis’ autobiography “Walking with the Wind”.
Timmeh on KO – could be just me – but I think he’s got that “I’m gonna fuck somebody up” look on his face.
And he says the race issue is a question “that must be asked”.
That’s a good friggin’ question.
You might be out of luck for now, believe it or not. (Hint to any young historians who might be lurking!!) However, Branch’s trilogy does cover the whole of King’s public career from the mid-50s in Birmingham.
We need to ignore all three: race, gender, and Karl Rove.
Note Tim Russert’s fat, flabby, red face. I think he needs a drink.
He prol’ly wants to stick it to HRC since she wouldn’t let him play “gotcha” on Press the Meat Sunday.
Great questions Teddy – it won’t surprise me if they are posed to both Senator Clinton & Obama. After all your questions are more astute then any others we’ll likely hear otherwise in the upcoming evening debate.
Hmmmmm. What did the Clintons say to Carville that he’s blabbed to Matalin in pillow talk that she’s whispered in Russert’s ear.
No incest there….
It makes sense to me too. ;-) I’ve never thought of the Clintons as racist. Never once.
Here’s the video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=v9LhWUsrJnM
Check it out yourself.
Glad I didn’t have a beverage in my hand when I read this. Too funny by half.
Oh Lord, what have we done? What has my country, our nation become? To the people of Iraq, Lahoma and i say we two are sorry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6r72eemX0M
Clinton, Edwards and Obama tonight. No Kucinich. KO.
No Kucinich looks like.
They sure are ramping up the grouping wars. It for now works into their story of not including Edwards in any convo (but could add him any time they wanted as they will go nonstop and pit him against the other two in a race/gender combo if they wanted). As well as no issues. It is great for a wider dialog but the pudits are so far pig headed that it is of course a scene in any case (since they have no skills even if they were off the money wagon/gravey train).
Anyway I hope some of the Democratic candidates give a speech in Michagan tomorrow (or later in the week, in addition to of course upcoming primary states) if they are allowed following the delgate boycott. It is too bad but glad they are debating Dems tonight and that the Republicans can have a primary and Duke (Cunningham) out their policies to destroy the Great Lakes and its States. I think the Republicans will paint that the Democrats are leaving the state to ruin but in the long run that should not be a winner (based on the real history); also will be interseting to see what only one primary will due to the outcome (McCain, Mitt, etc).
I think “the race issue” disappears after tonight.
At least in an intra-Dem-Party sense….
why?
Nevada Supreme Court ruling, just out.
Or do you mean more philosophically, upon what legal basis? Dunno.
Dunno, just that NV Supreme Court has ruled him out.
Brown people of Iraq, some of us are trying to understand your pain in the night. But we are unable to come close to understanding.
Keith sez Nevada Supremes rule Dennis out tonight.
I just got a call from Francine Busby. She’s helping Bob Hamilton against Issa too.
I talked Bob into BlogAds today!
What is particular sad about the political pundit class is the dearth of opinion. Again, like sportscasters, they have an incredibly limited set of narratives they know how to “call” in the moment and so the commentary ends up a long train of cliches design to reproduce itself. Global picture here: historic election (that itself is a cliche form), yet we will end up with same old, same old because. To really recognize its historical quality would mean pundits would have to try new things. Hence, right when you have an unprecedented competition for the Dem nomination, dirty Rove-style politics becomes the story of the day. Just easier to call.
Favorite sportscaster comment of all time (and I like sports, just sayin’) – “We are watching Worthy being hurt,” Lakers v. Celtics when it was too soon to go to commercial and all there was to look at was one unhappy James Worthy. Paid by the word.
Love the blog
Thanks for making me laugh, I needed it. I can here KO from the other room but I really don’t want to see Russert with that look on his face.
Lahoma advises me she is remains outraged with Democratic senators who voted to support George W. Bush’s murderous agenda in Iraq. My lady and I agree.
Want to know why I can’t stand HRC? Iraq.
AP – A 20-year-old pregnant Marine who disappeared in December told victims’ advocates at Camp Lejeune that she didn’t feel unsafe in the presence of the colleague now wanted in her death, Marine Corps officials said Tuesday.
And in yet another case of a candidate forgetting that there exist such things as videotape and YouTube, Huckabee just locked up the snake-handlers, while simultaneously blowing any chance to win the Repub nomination.
The Constitution must be amended to reflect the bible, indeed.
A Theocrabee? Huckabracy?
Maroon.
So that includes John Edwards?
I do not rule out that KKKarl was involved in rigging the machines in NH.
I honestly think the Dems should really work through the woman/race issue and move forward with more definition. That would be progress. We need progress on the issue. MLK would have had it done by now. Bless him!!
After the last few days of slogging through media idiocy and stupid surrogates who really should learn to STFU, I really needed to watch some MLK. I thought everyone could use a little as well…
Hey. You want to get into a pissing match? Edwards I believe said that his vote to attack Iraq was a mistake. You want to bounce? Let’s do it!
Edwards, and Clinton (and if one can pin him down Obama) are all for retaining “residual forces” in Iraq…y’know…just a couple of brigades (Note: a brigade constitutes about 3-4000 personnel) to protect the
Vaticanateembassy and reconstruction personnel. And they also want to have troops sitting across the border…a “Rapid Strike Force” to deal with problems in Iraq.Y’know kind of how the Israeli Defense Force deals with things in Gaza and Lebanon!
Countdown: “Huckabee sounding like William Jennings Bryan, towards the end”
From CNN:
Romney 1,044 39%
McCain 915 35%
Huckabee 319 12%
Paul 162 6%
Thompson 107 4%
Giuliani 73 3%
Uncommitted 31 1%
CHS, I agree, I have stated my position on MLK, and I will not be sated. More, more. He is the man.
Sounds like Robert Johnson’s “The Obama campaign — win, lose or draw — is going to have to address race,”
Geeze, what question? Exactly what are they demanding be asked and answered?
Why don’t you enlighten me. Which Democrat with a chance of being elected do you like for prez?
It is “selected,” kiddo, it is always “selected.”
If I were in that debate audience in Las Vegas, I would boo Russert when he is introduced.
Wow! You are passionate in your house tonight.
Great post, inspiring video and whip smart idea on how to bring the dems together. Hey are being moderated by two republicans that would happily lead them down the wrong path. How nice it would be to see our potential leadership unite and direct the discussion of this debate.
The Clinton also retracted her Iraq Authorization Vote- for exactly the same reason that Edwards has used…that he was told by Bush Adsministration Officials in the Intelligence Committee that Saddam had WMD’s and WMD programs. Both have said that they were wrong to trust Bush. Only Clinton appears to have gotten the heat for “being naive”. The bigshot lawyer who has taken on corporate America (while also advising the Fortress Investmenr Group ~manipulative subprime lenders to the poor) apparently gets a free ride on not being suspicious of Bush.
Apparently 30 other Senators and scores of House Members didn’t trust Bush enough to give him the Authorization to use Force…but they didn’t “know” what Edwards and Clinton did…or maybe they bothered to read the bloody NIE and see how questionable the conclusions were. Or maybe they were like the 20% of people out there in the public who opposed the invasion of Iraq because what was PUBLICALLY AVAILABLE.
And BTW If you think that Edwards is somehow so much more willing to vote his conscience rather than play politics remember that he was one of the ones that pushed Kerry not to rescind their votes on the IAUF in 2004. Edwards didn’t actually “apologize” for it well into the war becoming a quagmire…try and find a reference of his retraction within four years of the date of the vote.
As a last point…take a look at Edwards’ Herzliya speech of just a year ago to see exactly how he sees the Palestinian issue, Syria, and Iran. Just Google Herzliya and Edwards…his speech praising the heroism of Shamir is all right there.
http://www.boston.com/news/nat…..iraq_vote/
Kucinich. But I will vote for the nominee of my Party…and hope that the ones that are likely to be in play by the time I vote can be persuaded at the folly of their approaches.