New Book's Claim of Racist Rift Between Kennedy, Clinton is False

Game Changer, a new book by John Heilman and Mark Halperin, the political editor at ABC News, is creating a poltical storm. The book reported a claim that a racist remark by Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy "deeply offended" Kennedy and was the cause of Kennedy's endorsement of Obama during the Democratic primary.

The book has already created a stir by quoting Harry Reid in 2008 as saying that Obama could win because he was "light skinned" and didn't have a "Negro dialect."

Getting lost in all the controversy over Reid's remark is the report of the racist remark supposedly made by Bill Clinton that caused Kennedy to endorse Obama. The story is false.

First, Halperin ahd Heilman cannot quote any sources in a position to really substantiate the claim. This was supposedly a private phone call between Clinton and Kennedy, and he certainly didn't get it from Clinton. And he didn't get it from Kennedy.

Politico.com reported at the time of the Kennedy endorsement of Obama, that Ted Kennedy was is fact furious,but it was over what Kennedy felt was a slighting of the legacy of JFK by Hillary Clinton when she credited LBJ with getting the Civil Rights Act passed as part of her campaign theme that experience matters, Kennedy was furious because the Civil Rights Act was a JFK initiative and Hillary Clinton didn't give JFK the credit Ted Kennedy felt he deserved , insteaad focusing on LBJ.

Supposedly the comment that Halperin said was "racist" was Clinton's remark that "a few years ago this guy ( Obama) would have been getting us coffee".

With Clinton's history of fighting for civil rights it is only Halperins attempts at a smear against Clinton that could possibly interpret that comment as racist and its virtually impossible that Ted Kennedy did. Clinton, assuming he said it, was clearly referring to Obama's lack of experience and lack of accomplishment meaning that someone with Obama's resume would be lucky to be a staffer to either one of them much less be president. And Clinton had a valid point.

The idea that Kennedy would have found that comment "racist" is preposterous. Was does have credibility is the Politico.com story about Kennedy feeling Hillary slighted JFK over the Civil Rights Act.

The other claim made by the book was the supposedly "dismissive" and "racist" comment by Clinton about Obama's winning the South Carolina primary. First, Clinton's comments came before the primary results were in and his comments, that Jesse Jackson had won in South Carolina, the state with more black voters than any state in the country and was valid.

The Politics Daily writer giving credibility to the books account is Carl Cannon who recently defended Brit Hume's comment on Fox News that Tiger Woods should dump Buddhism and become a Christian because, in Cannon's words, that's what a Christian is supposed to do -- spread the "good news".

So much for his journalistic objectivity.