Subtext, or not?

Jake Tapper of ABC detects a certain deprecating subtext in Bill Clinton’s comments on Senator Barack Obama’s impressive 55/27 win in South Carolina, which doubled the total of John McCain’s votes in the GOP primary the other day:

Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ‘84 and ‘88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.”…I can’t understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as “the black candidate.”

Ah, wistful vista. The “fairy tale” comments by Bill Clinton a couple of weeks ago now seem like the good old days. BTW: why does the url for the ABC story call it “bubba-obama”?

One Response to “Subtext, or not?”

  1. sherlock Says:

    Bubba-orama? How about just Bubba-rama? Yeah, that sounds about right, as in:

    “The Dems tried to run a respectable nomination process, but got caught up yet again in a Bubba-rama.”

    Aaahh, yes - could I have some more popcorn, please?

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word