Johnson apologizes
Richard Prince reports that BET founder and Charlotte Bobcats owner Robert L. Johnson has abandoned his spin attempts and apologized to Barack Obama.
That would seem to give credence to my impression that Johnson's initial explanation that the veiled comments he made at a Hillary Clinton rally were referring to Obama's community organizing -- not his admitted drug use as a youth -- was as flimsy and contrived as it seemed.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I can understand him trying to slime Obama if he felt that's what he should do -- politics is a contact sport and sometimes people do nasty things in the name of winning.
I didn't agree with his doing it -- I thought it was in bad taste and a strategic misstep for the Clinton campaign to have a guy saying that while standing that close to them. But I understood it.
The "no, no -- I wasn't talking about what you know I was talking about" thing -- that was inexplicable and disgusting.
If you're going to throw an elbow, throw an elbow. But own it.
Posted on January 21, 2008 11:16 AM
I'm glad your impression got credence Allen. The Robert Johnson remarks are just the latest of many. The Clinton smear machine is alive and well from both Clintons and their minions.
Here's a good one from that right wing bastion The Daily Kos:
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2007/12/4/95938/1959/821#c821
And another:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/19/181938/426/674/439681
I love it when the Daily Kos is slamming Hillary!!
And one that Obama isn't pro-abortion enough:
http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/01/010708smear.htm
Ironically from a gay news website.
Or Hillary's NH Co-Chair Bill Shaheen insinuating that Obama was once a drug dealer. To his credit Shaheen resigned, but it's an example one of taking the fall for the Clintons to continue the smear machine.
http://www.nysun.com/article/68059
When the far left Kos is whining about Clinton smears you know something is going on.
Of course if Hillary gets the nomination and undoubtedly switches the smears to her Republican opponent there will be deafening silence from the far left. Mark my word.
Posted on January 21, 2008 11:35 AM
Joe, I agree. I also wonder how calculated the comments were in the first place ... were they slips of the tongue or planned in advance?
This was, after all, the second time a Clinton surrogate linked Obama to drugs.
Either way Johnson's remarks were tastleless.
On the other hand, they did get lots of attention.
To whose benefit/detriment remains to be seen.
Posted on January 21, 2008 12:06 PM
If Bob Johnson feels the need to apologize about something, he needs to say "I'm sorry" about what happened to BET.
The public affairs and teen-oriented programming used to be worthwhile. Its religious programming on Sundays is still pretty good. But most of their shows are merely exploitive garbage (remember the "Hot Ghetto Mess" controversy only a few months ago?)
Brief funny story...right after I started teaching at Andrews one day, the kids tried to sucker me into putting BET on the classroom TV one day (our interim principal at the time staunchly said "no BET on any of the TVs during the day). I put on the FOX News Channel instead...in an attempt to expand their minds a bit.
One of many teachable moments.
Posted on January 21, 2008 12:44 PM
Allen, wanted to thank you or whoever wrote today's "Grier's Legacy" piece for at least hinting at the absurd irony of Terry Grier taking credit for his list of achievements while implying he was completely AWOL on the defining, watershed moment of his tenure-the High Point forced- busing plan.
It would have been nice if you would have gone the extra yard, maybe for your readers who have not followed this story closely, and posed the question (ie: "Dr. Grier how is this possible") in print directly, instead of leaving it up to the reader entirely.
This encapsulates the great problems of Terry Griers legacy. Questions of character, honesty and the N&R's reluctance in the past to act as anything other than a cheerleader for this man.
Posted on January 22, 2008 8:47 AM
"...politics is a contact sport and sometimes people do nasty things in the name of winning." If resorting to lies, distortions and slimes is what it takes to win, does anyone think that those people do not have enough integrity to represent us in elected offices?
The Clinton's would not be hired if they had to go through normal and routine job interviews and background checks. Many company's today use credit checks to prove character. What part of Bill Clinton lied under oath to the Supreme Court while Pres and was 1/2 impeached does the public not get?
If enough people demand integrity, we just might get it.
Posted on January 27, 2008 5:43 PM