WASHINGTON (AP) - By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is "palling around with terrorists" and doesn't see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign.And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.
. . .Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?
This is . . . what's the correct word? Right, lunatic. Obama's connections to Bill Ayers are, to be sure, overblown by his opponents. And I doubt they're doing the McCain campaign much good. But connecting Barack Obama to a white radical hippie is not, as the article implies, the same thing as the Willie Horton ads. Ayers was not a black panther, nor a member of Hamas. Palin is trying to paint Obama as an effete closet socialist, not a radical muslim. Suggesting otherwise is far less credible than the original attack it criticizes.
As an enthusiastic Obama supporter, I agree.
Calling this line of attack racist is ridiculous and helps nobody.
But, then, I have been impressed recently with how bad political analysis is from most mainstream sources. To me, it seems that they are not so much biased as just incompetent.
Megan, your expertise is in econ so when you dart into the pure political sphere, be extra careful. It's not just Ayers that McPalin are seeking to associate Obama with - from Ezra Klein: 'Sarah Palin says that "[Barack Obama] is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country." Republicans are preparing to elevate threatening Muslim associations like Rashid Khalidi, a Columbia University Middle East History professor with longtime Palestinian sympathies, and Ali Abunimah, who I've never even heard of, but who has a usefully Arab-sounding name.'
Am sorry, discretely trying to links Obama to Muslims is NOT lunatic. It is a deliberate attempt to play to peoples' lack of knowledge and fears about Arabs/Muslims. And yes, that may not be "racist" but it discriminatory and disgusting in my book.
Willie Horton wasn't a fictional character invented to demonize Dukakis; he was a real person.
True, of course. But do you really think that the Willie Horton ads were not playing on racial fears? I mean, really? Seriously?
Certain McCain attacks may be racist in the sense that they are seeking to profit from racism. Many voters don't know who William Ayers is so an attack over Obama paling around with terrorists is interpreted as an Obama paling around with Islamic Terrorists. This plays off the misconception over Obama's status as a supposed Muslim double agent or some other common fiction.
These McCain attacks legitimacy is contingent on paranoia and xenophobia and craven manipulation. I know such gambits aren't uncommon from either side of the isle but when they occur it is not lunacy to object to the cynical self interested massaging of peoples worst prejudices and suspicions.
My goodness...let me first say that to draw a racial context from Gov. Palin's comments is ridiculous by the AP. That being said, to say that Obama is "palling" around with terrorists is meant to not envoke a foriegn, scary meme is equally as ridiculous. I can't think of anyone who hears the word terrorist and thinks 60's radical as oppossed to Muslim extremist. Of course those of us that have been following along know who Bill Ayers is, clearly the campaign is not talking those in the know. They are talking to the crowd that subscribes to, Obama who is he?
Racial, no. Slimy, extremely.
G.Gordon Liddy is a fabled hero of the right, who has written about firebombing the Brooking Institue along as other sordid crimes, one would consider acts of domestic terrorism whom McCain considers an "old friend" and has gone on his radio show back in May. No memtion of that in the news.
I think there's more going on in Palin's statement than you give it credit for. It doesn't matter that Ayers is a white former hippie who committed terrorist acts in the 60s - in this post-9/11 world, I guarantee you most Americans think of Islamic extremists when they hear the word "terrorist." I think this is meant to capitalize on the rumors that Barack "Hussein" Obama is secretly a Muslim, the implication being that this makes him a scary choice for president. Maybe "racist" is the wrong word to describe her statement, but whatever the right word, it's not flattering.
Ayers was not a black panther, nor a member of Hamas.
But Palin comments as reported in the article didn't specify white anti-Vietnam terrorists from the '60s. She doesn't talk about the Weathermen or '60s radicals or even leftists. She just said Obama's been palling around with terrorists.
Now what immediately springs to mind when you discuss terrorists in this day and age? Vietnam era leftists? The IRA or Shining Path perhaps? Or does al Qaeda? To a very large extent, Americans have forged an exclusive connection between Islam and terrorism, not just since 9/11, but going far back to the various radical Palestinian movements and the state sponsorship of terrorism by countries like Libya. Why? Because, for the most part, only Muslim terrorists have directly threatened Americans over the past 30 years or so.
This is a crude attempt to create a link between Osama and Obama, with Ayers conveniently providing cover. Palin is very deliberately playing off the Muslim rumors and the "Hussein" innuendo.
Are muslims a race now?
I'll come out and say that Ayer's connection to Obama is too close for my comfort. And it isn't that Ayer's took up an armed conflict against the US, it's that Ayers continues to believe that the US should be overthrown. And while I can believe that Obama rejects that (in fact, I do believe that), the two apparently have enough in common that Ayers helped launch Obama's career. That's what concerns me.
But, putting all of that aside, is this what we have to look forward to for the next 4 years? Any criticism of Obama will be called racism?
"Ayers continues to believe that the US should be overthrown."
Uh, you're gonna need to cite an accusation like that. The "didn't do enough" quote referred to a wish that more effective protests against Vietnam were done, not that he wishes he'd have continued bombings for 40 years and wants the overthrow of the government. That's way, way out of line.
Your point assumes that the average reader knows which "terrorist" Palin is talking about. Most Americans don't know who Ayers is. By using the vague word "terrorist" she is leaving her words open to racial interpretation. She could have used the words "domestic terrorist" or "old radical white guy." But she didn't. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume her word choice was intentional.
"By using the vague word "terrorist" she is leaving her words open to racial interpretation."
Thankfully, we have the MSM and other Obama supporters to clarify that she was referring to Ayers, who is only a white, leftist domestic terrorist who barely killed anyone. Hate for anyone to think his terrorist friends weren't of the proper demographic.
Maybe not racist as we've come to think of racism in this campaign season, but tell me what picture pops into your mind when you hear "terrorists" and "doesn't see America like we see America" in the same breath. Could it be... a dark-skinned Muslim? Someone, perhaps, named Hussein?
I'll bet it isn't an image of a white college kid in the 60's.
This is what Palin said. Note that she's talking in the present tense about "terrorists" plural, and that she doesn't mention Ayers by name. Just "terrorists" and "forces of good".
"Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country," Palin told a group of donors in Englewood, Colo. A deliberate attempt to smear Obama, McCain's ticket-mate echoed the line at three separate events Saturday.
"This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America," she said. "We see America as a force of good in this world. We see an America of exceptionalism."
It was, perhaps, no accident that the man who introduced Palin said this:
"On Nov. 4, let's leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened," a Florida official says, warming up the crowd for Palin, who wasn't yet there.
Barbara
Who knew there was such a resevoir of good feeling for The Weather Underground and William Ayers?!
This is the process by which we go about evaluating candidates who are allowed to do so via public policy?
How embarrassing....if not a little frightening.
other comments above have mentioned this, but just my two cents:
The problem with the McCain campaign's new "palling around with terrorists" line is that it does not refer specifically to William Ayer, but to generally terrorists as a whole. In this day and age, when most people hear the word "terrorist" they do not think of a white radical from the 1960's, they think of a brown Muslim from the Middle East. This generalization isn't incidental, its strategic, and it has been repeated many times recently.
Is it racially tinged? One way to answer that is to ask, would the effect of the statement be different if Obama was a white person? Most likely. Crudely put, most people will more easily associate a brown guy with Islamic terrorists than a white guy (I would know, I'm a brown, bearded guy).
Is it totally beyond the pale? I wouldn't go that far. After all, Obama IS associated with someone with terrorist connections which also makes this line of attack more effective. (Palin could not use such an attack on me, because as far as I know, I don't know anyone associated with terrorism of any kind).
However, it would be accurate to call it 'racially tinged'. But many things are, so I'm not sure what prompted such outrage at the comment.
Knowing that any attack that can't be summed up with a sound bite less five seconds long is worthless, is there anyway that they can make that attack in a racially sensitive manner? If the automatic assumption is terrorist=swarthy dark males, is there a way to make this attack that isn't racist? Should McCain not point out shady characters in Obamas background simply because they could possibly, if you don't know any background, he could be considered racist?
She makes it clear that she's talking about domestic terrorists. Ayers is a domestic terrorist and he's a white guy. Logic tells me the it is impossible that bringing up Obama's association with a white domestic terrorist can be classed as racist.
The trick (in our society) for propaganda is to allow the liar to deny that they meant/wanted to lie.
"Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." - G. W. Bush, October 2002.
Sketch the picture and let the listener *paint* the picture. The above doesn't say that Saddam HAS nukes or could GET nukes, but that's the way the listener is intended to 'color' it.
When you really want to say that Barack is a swarthy Muslim terrorist, but you can't, just drop the words 'terrorist' and 'palling around' into the pool and let the listener do the rest.
No, there's no way you can prove that's racist. So it's probably better not to say 'racist'. Note that the Obama campaign didn't say 'racist' by the way - they're smarter than that.
I don't know how to specifically counter impressionistic smears or other sketchy propaganda except by somebody doing a reality check and looking at the details. That happens sometimes - for example, if you ask Sarah Palin follow-up questions concerning exactly WHAT she means by "extensive foreign policy experience" etc.
Fortunately Obama's got a good counter-narrative going - by appearing on nationally televised debates and looking like a nice clean cut young man, sober and maybe just a little wonky. Not a turban in sight.
Obama's job is to become "one of my best friends" as in "I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black." Fortunately, every time he appears on TV, it's obvious that he's not part of that undifferentiated mass of dangerous swarthy people and is instead a particular nice young man who really wants to help you. A friend of yours - familiar, maybe even a little boring at times.
I think a larger point here (props to Joe Canadian) is the notion that there is some clear line dividing racial attacks from non-racial attacks. In today's society we have set up this false expectation that all racial comments are 'beyond the pale' and thus comments must either fall in one or the other category.
The reality is that race is a complex issue and its virtually impossible for McCain to attack Obama in a way that's completely non-racial. Most of McCain's criticisms of Obama can be interpreted in a racial way. However the racial connotations for most of them are incidental, not intentional. That doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to scrutinize McCain's statements.
Ok clearly Meghan and others who agree with her-you are reading too deep- when the racist inference is right on the surface. The racial slander is not the link to Ayers itself- but rather the title of "Terrorist(s)".
See its not like Palin goes on to explain the times Ayers was involved allegedly in bombings of the Pentagon- the hositility that took place durring the 60's and how almost every anti-war protestor violent or not has an FBI file with their name on it next to domestic terror threat. So its the implication that a man named "Barack Obama" has been palling around with "terrorists". The thing is to "Joe six pack" there is no difference between the Terrorists who attacked the US on 9/11...and an Anti War group who at times used hostile and violent measures against the country (which mind you has been proven to have played a part in forcing the US to eventually end the tragedy of the Vietnam war- due to the ongoing pressure of Anti War protestors and groups that were becoming more and more in their face and in the face of the public).
So you see Meghan- it is not that Ayers or his race really has anything to do with it except for the term in which they refer to him "Terrorist"- inciting the already lingering fear behind Obama's name and those hateful emails questioning his religion and citizenship- it plays into all of it- McCain knows it and thats why they proceed in using it.
It is as least a Fear Tactic- and at best a racial one- playing into the racial issues some Americans still have on the surface of Barack Obama- his name and the color of his skin.
No one seems to point out the radical right wing connections John McCain has- but I guess that's not as scary?? Or the radical religious beliefs of Sarah Palin who listens to anti semitic preachers or is being blessed by a witch doctor- but I guess thats not as scary either??
Its all propoganda- and most won't buy into it- and those that do- really just need another excuse to think what they already thought to be true. Ignorance!
I'll come out and say that Ayer's connection to Obama is too close for my comfort.
I'll come out and say that you are a weak-minded, easily manipulated fool. Good day, sir.
I'm semi-relieved somebody can see some sense in the AP story. For me though the usual association, eg NPR: 'He was on a couple of charitable boards with Ayers' go so far to distort the connection when he may well have got his foothold in politics in Illinois from Ayers and share ideological views with the continuing to be revolutionary Ayers that the sensitivity doesn't cut it. The obvious next question if the audience might think Islamic terorist is which one which would lead away from the racist possibility. OTOH, one of the advantages of Obama is 'it takes one to know one (or befriend one)' referring to his Islamic and nonwhite background in part. So I don't see why the good and bad of your new best friend might not be looked into.
The best thing we could do to help prevent discrimination against Muslims is to point out that there are lots of homegrown terrorists to. Like say Bill Ayers and his nasty wife. Muslims would seem to have a point if they wondered why it is that they get investigated and sent to jail for sending money to Hammas when someone like Ayers is rewarded with a professorship. God knows if either candidate were associated with a former Muslim terrorist they would be done. Start your career with a cute white girl and her husband and that is okay I guess. If anything the casual acceptance of Ayers by the left shows how truely racist they are. They would never casually accept a former terrorist who wasn't white, upper middle class and one of them.
And so it begins. Welcome to the new United States, where critcizing your president's policies, conduct, past associations, decisions, etc. will be branded as racist. Have fun.
"She could have used the words "domestic terrorist" or "old radical white guy." But she didn't."
No, she used the term "terrorists who targeted their own country." How is that substantively different from "domestic terrorist"?
Palin's comment is directed at the typical American voter, i.e., someone who doesn't have a clue who Bill Ayers is and for whom "terrorist" = "scary brown guy who wants to blow me up".
Remember, nuance is not exactly her strong suit.
Marc, you are assuming that your average white voter knows that Ayers is white. The McCain campaign does not discuss his color or the cause he supported or any such thing. Just that he's a crazy bomb-throwing radical associated with this black candidate from the south side of Chicago. I imagine that a good number of voters assume Ayers is some sort of Black Panther.
B, How come the AP can't just tell who she is referring to if they want to report. Is it because, whatever he is, he is not "just a guy in the neighborhood." Who made that misleading statement? The MSM does not know what it, to be 'nonracist,' it is at liberty to say.
Eliot: 'She could have used the words "domestic terrorist" or "old radical white guy." But she didn't.'
Me: 'No, she used the term "terrorists who targeted their own country."'
My mistake. She later referred to "terrorists who targeted their own country", but when she first began to talk about Ayers she said "According to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist...".
How was this carefully crafted to make people think of Al Qaeda?
This line of politics is of course not racist.
However, if you hang around with mass murderers, I might question your judgment.
If you hang around with unrepentant domestic terrorists and nutty preachers for, oh, 20+years (not appearing for one campaign even at Hagee's church, which I know you'll bring up), maybe I can question your judgement, Barack.
And it's not racist. Never mind that I'm as white as Barack.
Talk about situational ethics gone amok. Do any of you pro Obama rationalists even know who the Weathermen were? Do you even know who Ayers is and what his role was.
Among all the wonderful things his group did was kill several policeman, rob an armour car and kill a few more. I won't even mention the bombings. Their intent was the overthrow of the US government and the introduction of a Communist state. I suppose in your twisted logic, no big deal. Were they spoiled idiot rich kids? Of course.
Quick question, have any of you moronskis been to Chicago? Ayers, Dohrn and their backgrounds are celebrated by their cadre of followers to this day. Your Messiah knew and condoned what they did--how can I be sure of that, because he was their friends. Mr Ayers launched Obama's career in his living room.
While I doubt McCain/Palin will win, no matter what their strategy, I am very glad that everyone will know more about Obama. This is just the start. You will come to know all the people in his life. What you will never know, unlike most candidates is what he did at Columbia and Harvard, no grades, no friends, no written papers. He's a fraud. All shuck and jive.
As to your attempts at race baitng via the terrorist handle, even our host saw thru that one, Ayers et al were labelled domestic terrorists by the FBI in the 70's. Ayers disputes the label because he said they never purposely targeted civilians. A distinction without a difference. But you, you will buy it.
Ryan,
Oh, sorry, that's right--no one minds being raped by an escaped convicted murder if the escapee is white! How could we have forgotten?
Nice of you to leave out the actual argument from a piece labeled "analysis", Megan. Otherwise people might disagree with you.
Here's what Megan didn't want you to read.
In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers' day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.
Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as "not like us" is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.
Oops. Messed up the blockquote somehow, everything from "Palin's words" to the end of my comment is a quote from the AP Analysis piece.
Look, the thing that makes the article's "analysis" silly is that the Right side of the blogosphere has been pushing the Ayers line of attack for months. And knowing that the vast majority of the public has never heard of Ayers or Dohrn (and has, for that matter, only the vaguest idea what & who the Weathermen/Weather Underground were), they've taken it upon themselves to explain who these people were and what they did. Repeatedly. In detail. They wanted it clear exactly who and what we were talking about here.
That was and is (IMO) an uncommonly silly line of attack, but it was that attack, and not some purposely-vague BS about Obama "palling around with terrorists." I doubt that the people pushing it did so on the off-chance that someone in the McCain campaign would take it up and strip off all references to the time, place, and whiteness of the miscreants.
elf,
If that's what passes as "analysis", no wonder Megan didn't recognize it at such.
Shorter anti-Palin commenters: When Sarah Palin doesn't know something, she's an ignorant hick who isn't ready for prime time. When she does know something and shares it during prime time, she's a devious rhetorical nemesis of Roveian skill.
It would almost be worth a McCain/Palin administration just to watch the BDS sufferers advance forward into PDS and finally snap like three chords' worth of old guitar strings.
This just kills me. The bedrock support of the Republican Party since Nixon has been the proverbial Joe Six Pack who cared principally about one thing: Race - being a member of the party that didn't have black people in it. If you don't know that, you weren't paying attention in the 70's. The Republicans have taken that for granted for so long that they apparently have begun believing all Republicans follow, for instance, the closely-reasoned philosophical arguments against affirmative action. In the hinterlands, affirmative action is just a buzzword for the problem with black people. Similarly, the people who will be influenced by linking Obama with a terrorist will think only Obama-terrorist-muslim-the other. Do you think anybody conjoining Obama and terrorism at the local cafe in BFE as a result of this recent stuff from Palin will know or care anything about Ayers? If so, you haven't spent enough time in BFE to know your ass from your elbow about who will be influenced there by the Ayers' stuff and why.
Re: That being said, to say that Obama is "palling" around with terrorists is meant to not envoke a foriegn, scary meme is equally as ridiculous. I can't think of anyone who hears the word terrorist and thinks 60's radical as oppossed to Muslim extremist.
Do we usually label any purely domestic character a terrorist, however ghastly his deeds? The KKK is just the KKK. Tim McVeigh was portrayed as an anti-government zealot, maybe a militia stalwart or a white supremacist. I don't think anyone ever labeled the old 60s radicals "terrorists". Certainly not at the time they were active. No, "terrorism" is always regarded as a foreign career choice.
Re: I'll come out and say that Ayer's connection to Obama is too close for my comfort.
I hope no one ever runs for president who happened to be in the same military unit Tim McVeigh served in. Charges of "associating with a mass murderer" would apparently pass muster with you.
Re: Any criticism of Obama will be called racism?
Personal attacks based on guilt by association and unproven innuendo-- yes, they may be called "racism". But never fear: you will be free to criticize Obama's policies and positions all you want. The problem is the Right doesn't even have a drunken, stuttering ghost of a suggestion as to where the country shoul go from here, or how to get out of this record-seting mess they've landed the whole world in.
Re: Who knew there was such a resevoir of good feeling for The Weather Underground and William Ayers?!
Most of us never heard of the guy (or his group) and we don't give at tinkers damn about them either-- that was forty fricking years ago! The armies of the CSA killed far more Americans than 60s radicals ever dreamed of, but would it have been appropriate in 1908 to criticize either Mr. Taft or Mr. Bryan if it had discovered that one of them had once had a very casual association with a former CSA soldier or official?
Re: She makes it clear that she's talking about domestic terrorists.
See above. The average person doesn't think there is such a thing as a "domestic terrorist".
Re: Ayers, Dohrn and their backgrounds are celebrated by their cadre of followers to this day.
See above also. The CSA did far, far more harm (by whole orders of magnitude) in the 1860s than all the hippies and yippies and radicals in the 1960s could have done in a million years. Yet ex-Confederates were lionized for decades after the Civil War: Birth Of A Nation; Gone With The Wind, etc. If the USA of the 1900s could let the Civil War rest in peace I think it's high time to let the 1960s pass to the history books. We've got some big, big problems to deal with in this country. Chanting "Amnesty, Acid and Aborion", or "Hey, hey LBJ..." is not going to solve those problems. In fact, it's escapism of the worst sort.
Re: Your Messiah knew and condoned what they did--how can I be sure of that, because he was their friends.
Obama was a child in grade school in the 1960s. Are you really trying to claim a child of his years was somehow implicated in 60s bombing plots? If that's your argument against the man then it's time for the GOP to go the way of the Know Nothings. You are morally and intellectually bankrupt.
(PS: My messiah is Jesus Christ, and I find your calumny in that regard blasphemous and offensive)
Adam,
That's a fair point. Certainly, aging mellows radicals out (that and pampered living). Would he do it again, though? His own words (cited via Wikipedia):
"How do you feel about what you did? Would you do it again under similar circumstances?" He replied:[24] "I've thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it's impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don't think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable."
So, if there were a revolution of small-c communists, would he support them? Most probably. Does he have any regret for what he did? Yes, by his own words. But he can't admit that what he did was wrong, and that's the definition of unrepentant.
Yes, he has equivocated that statement since then, but the mindset of a man who cannot condemn the type of past that he had is something to be suspicious of. And Barrack Obama found that acceptable. The analogy here would be associations with the Klan, but that hasn't killed Byrd's career (though I will grant that he has made the necessary moves to distance himself from his past).
Bending over backwards:
But connecting Barack Obama to a white radical hippie is not, as the article implies, the same thing as the Willie Horton ads. Ayers was not a black panther, nor a member of Hamas. Palin is trying to paint Obama as an effete closet socialist, not a radical muslim.
No. Effete closet socialists are not tarred with the word "terrorist". That would be the "arugula/latte/chablis" attack, which is different. The use of "terrorist" is intended to associate Obama with Al-Qaeda and to link Al-Qaeda back to '60s radicals. You will note "terrorist fist-jab" for reference.
Yes, he has equivocated that statement since then, but the mindset of a man who cannot condemn the type of past that he had is something to be suspicious of.
I would expect that someone like Bill Ayers would respond with something along these lines: John McCain participated in Operation Rolling Thunder, which according to CIA estimates killed over 50,000 Vietnamese civilians. No one can know how many Vietnamese civilians McCain personally killed by dropping unguided bombs in a heavily populated urban area. The US was not at war with North Vietnam and had never been attacked by North Vietnam. The record shows McCain enthusiastically cheered on the escalation of US bombing in 1967 and was eager to participate in these raids. The raids accomplished nothing, as the Pentagon concluded in early 1968. True, McCain was following orders. But he has refused ever to apologize for what he did, and in fact his only regret is that the US did not bomb harder and widen its targeting rules further.
Someone like Bill Ayers might feel that there is no reason for him to apologize until McCain does.
Ok, so Ayers is a terrorist by any reasonable definition, right (working for a group that committed murder for political ends)?
Obama does have a pretty close personal association with him, right (political career launched in his living room, etc.)?
Both of the premises are true but saying that Obama associates with terrorists might be vaguely racist. Why? Well, because we all know that most terrorists really are muslims but we can't say that (because that would be racist).
This really is very similar to the Willy Horton ads. Here's how: Willy Horton really was a criminal, Dukakis really did furlough him when he was in prison for murder, Willy Horton then did go on rape and murder (?) someone when out. The Willy Horton ads were bad because they reminded us that the pious platitudes we all have to mouth about crime really are false and this is racist. Racist here seems to be a code word for "points out a fact about reality that makes progressives angry".
Look at all the black people who get into our political system. Crack smoking mayors, Kwami Kilpatrick, 3-4 of the democrats who blocked republicans from regulating Fannie and Freddie with their nasty attitudes. They always try to squirm out of their illegal behavior by claiming "public lynching" and "Racism." Liberals need to wake up and realize that these people don't even share you values. Go live in the hood and see the violence, iresponsibley, and inablity to accept responsiblity. You dont't find the same reality in poor white neighborhoods. In fact, plent of poor white neighborhoods are so safe you can leave your doors unlocked.
REALITY CHECK. WAKE UP AND SEE WHAT THE REAL THREAT TO CIVILIZED SOCIETY IS!!!!
I agree with Bri. How are we ever going to fix our goverment if we can't challenge them based on their race. Its a blatent generalizatiom to link whites with slavery and racism. Most people who were born with white skin had nothing to to with it and did not prosper in an way, shap, or form from slavey. America needs to question Obama. In facxt, many white people find it highly offensive that he went to that racist blank church. Nobody has any respect for the white mans feeling. Blacks surely wouldnt let a white candidate run with such racist ties. We are not allowed to even question this little punks accosiation because he hides behind the race card, accusing any difficult questions as being racist. This bullcrap is growing resentment and even racism in the white community who have been taught to treat everyone equally from an early age. Think about all the blacks that cheered and celebrated when OJ killed to people with a knife and got off. Many people are starting to realize that blacks are not mentally equiped to survive in a civilized society. Look at every plack nation, run by black, prove me otherwise.
Please, you are all being dense. It is not the invocation of Bill Ayers that creates a racially charged subtext. It is the statement that Barack Obama doesn't see the world like "other Americans." Because he's, you know, different. Threatening. The Other. BLACK.
There's this persistent undertone that some people are real Americans and do real American things, while others (typically Democrats) are suspect elites who vacation in exotic places like Hawaii - which Cokie Roberts informs me is in fact a state, but still not a suitable place for a candidate's vacation. Normally this stuff is just Toby Keith-style jingoism with some anti-intellectual special sauce, but the criticisms aimed at Obama have also tried to push the race-discomfort button.
As the old joke goes, "So when did you stop beating your wife?"
This is a brilliant move by the McCain campaign.
They accuse Obama (truthfully) of "palling around" with "domestic terrorists". This might stick - but then again, it might not. Either way, it doesn't matter, because the McCain campaign is covered by the word "domestic"
The Obama people, trying prevent associations with Al Qaeda, start shouting "Actually no, Obama's favorite terrorists are white!"
PROFIT!
I think "xenophobic" might be a more accurate accusation here. The stuff about "unlike other Americans", etc. Although not aimed at them in some cases African-Americans can be xenophobic as well. (At least I've heard that a small minority of African Americans do not have a good view of African immigrants)
Who cares if the AP was "inaccurate" in calling Palin's comments racist. The McCain folks basically ran ads calling Obama a sexualizer of children, intent on teaching "comprehensive sex education to kindergarteners." And guess what? They did NOT apologize for that slander, so why should Obama apologize for anything he might say?
I will say it again: if someone slaps you in the face, you do not engage in a discussion about non-violence . . . because they are not non-violent. No, you kick them in the nuts, the gouge their eyes. Because that is what they understand.
If McCain's people call Obama a terrorist, he should call McCain an unhinged senile old coot. If they raise Bill Ayers, you raise McCain's cavorting with Keating, then raise them a "which administration is more likely to have a twelve step meeting in the White House." They come at you with a knife, you blast them with a 9 milimeter Ruger.
I leave with a joke I just heard. McCain and Obama are campaigning in a small town. They both stop in the town's only barbershop for a haircut and sit in adjoining chairs. After his cut and a shave, the barber asks McCain whether he wants aftershave. "No thanks," McCain says, "I don't want to go home to my wife smelling like a whorehouse."
The other barber then asks Obama if he wants aftershave. Obama says "Sure. My wife doesn't know what a whorehouse smells like."
Someone like Bill Ayers might feel that there is no reason for him to apologize until McCain does.
So the moral definitions here are strung on the fragile thread of "sure, I was a bad domestic terrorist, but it's all good because he was worse on a foreign battlefield"?
Wow. That's, uh, deep...
aMouse: I'm not going to bother to look this up, but I believe Bill Ayers and the Weathermen set off bombs primarily in a (stupid and criminal) attempt to end the Vietnam War, right?
So I believe the argument would run something along the lines of committing violence to prevent greater violence.
Look, there's one guy involved in this presidential campaign who dropped bombs on cities for political aims, and almost certainly killed civilians. He did it enthusiastically. He still thinks it was a good idea. It isn't Barack Obama.
Soldiers end up doing a lot of terrible things, but they do them because they are are ordered to do them, comparing John McCain who followed his orders while serving his country to a bunch of rich idiots building bombs in the village as part of their 'war' on America to help bring about the downfall of capitalism and a world communist state is crazy.
It is also TRUE that the bill Obama voted for did include language about 'comprehensive education for kindergarteners on safe sex and HIV/AIDS'..I'm not sure how the campaign was able to put it over that this charge was a "lie" since it is crystal clear in the language of the bill that 'comprehensive, age appropriate education' would be included. My guess and my belief is that there is no age appropriate information on HIV and safe sex that can be given to a 6 year old.
I am much more troubled by Obama's 20 year association with Rev. Wright, who is a hate mongering racist, than his much more casual association with unrepentant domestic terrrorist Bill Ayers. Of course, no one is going to talk about Wright because continuing to question Obama's judgement about his spiritual mentor being a racist would be 'racist'...
Politicians can avoid getting accused of being jerks by not acting like jerks. Reminds me of the Clinton days. We can debate forever whether Clinton should have gotten into as much trouble as he had for getting oral from Monica Lewinsky. But, he could have avoided it all by simply avoiding Lewinsky in the first place.
Similarly, if Obama didn't want people to criticize him for associating with a retired terrorist (Ayers), belonging to a church run by a radical anti-American preacher (Wright), approving another radical preacher (Pfleger), or getting a sweetheart deal from a convicted felon (Rezko), he could have simply not done these things. The vast, vast majority of Americans would have nothing to do with someone who bombed government buildings.
I guess you missed the part where people at her rally were yelling "kill him" and telling black members of the press present to "sit down, boy." Palin's claims that "he's not one of us" and accusations swirling around his "terrorist" connections play into the same hateful arguments made by people who call Obama by his middle name and argue that he's a Muslim. It all plays upon race- and religion-based prejudice and fear, and whether Ayers is white or not (you are attributing rationality where it does not exist), for those people in the audience yesterday, "terrorist" simply meant evil in a dark-skinned Islamic suit.
The message is only as important as how it is received, and the reception of Palin's message at both her rallies yesterday is coming in loud and clear: it inflamed and emboldened the worst tendencies of racial bigotry that we've seen publicly at a major party political rally probably since the 60s. And she just kept right on delivering that message.
"I believe Bill Ayers and the Weathermen set off bombs primarily in a (stupid and criminal) attempt to end the Vietnam War, right?"
No, they wanted to do much more. When asked what he wanted at the time, Ayers said he wanted to kill all rich people. When someone pointed out that he came from a rich family, he replied "Bring the Revolution Home. Kill your parents."
Ayer's wife (who also owns the home that Obama used to kick off his State Senate campaign) thought of Charles Manson as a role model for the Weathermen and talked glowingly of how they killed the "pigs" and then sat down and ate in the same room and even stuck a fork in the stomach of a pregnant dead woman. "Dig it!" "Wild!"
Of course Ayers only married Dohrn later, after his first girlfriend was killed helping to build a bomb to set off at a dance that evening at Fort Dix. The Weathermen had hoped to kill many, many people who came to attend the dance.
Katie - I guess you missed the part where people at the rally lynched 25 people, then bathed in the blood of virgin minority women they had ritually slaughtered at the mouth of a nearby volcano.
If you're going to make up crazy accusations, go whole hog. Don't limit yourself to mere name-calling and shouts of "kill him!"...
At first I agreed with Megan that none of this is racist, but I think we're all missing the true effect of racism/political correctness here. Obama seems to have been comfortable with a crowd that many would consider to be anti-American - people that see the US as the true evil in the world, the source of all problems, etc. The best evidence of that is Obama's church and Rev. Wright, but Wright is black, so the McCain campaign feels more comfortable pointing at Ayers, the rich white kid that advocated killing all rich people including his own parents.
Obama's connection to Wright was deep and intricately connected to Wright's views about American and the world, blacks and whites, etc. (Obama sat there and listened to Wright preach for years, and looked to him for spiritual guidance). Obama's connection to Ayers is disturbing as far as it goes, but it doesn't go very far. The McCain camp is focusing on a minor connection rather than a major one purely because of race.
"The message is only as important as how it is received, and the reception of Palin's message at both her rallies yesterday is coming in loud and clear: it inflamed and emboldened the worst tendencies of racial bigotry that we've seen publicly at a major party political rally probably since the 60s. And she just kept right on delivering that message."
So, since what she said was actually true but it apparently inflamed people who are racists (who then oppose Obama for that reason), to be non racist you can't say anything that people who oppose Obama would like to hear.
That's pretty clear. Thanks.
Criticizing Obama = racism.
I don't think these comments alone are necessarily racist, but it's certainly interesting that people speaking at Palin rallies are commonly referring to him as Barack Hussein Obama. When used in conjunction with the "pall'in around with terrorists" comment, this is an overt attempt to portray him as a Muslim terrorist.
Not only that, but Palin has a group of followers who have been heard shouting racial slurs at her rallies and reffering to Obama as a terrorist (shouting such when his name is mentioned).
And I don't think it's much of a secret that Palin has some racist leanings. She was overheard (loudly) declaring in an Alaska restaurant, "So, Sambo beat the b*tch" when Obama one the democratic primary. This was in a public restaurant, at a table with 5 or 6 people and others at nearby tables. Not caring whether she was heard by others, she broke into laughter after saying it.
So, Criticizing Obama != racism
But, Sarah Palin == racist
Palin Supporter says "KILL HIM"
It is a violation of the law to threaten a seating Senator. Treason is punishable by Death....
Racism is still Alive in America....
25% of U.S. Army soldiers are Black....
U.S. Army Vet - 9 years
With what happened after Katrina , Bush's record on civil rights, and McCain's "that one" comment, the republicans might as well be dressing up in sheets and burning crosses on people's lawns.
"Palin is trying to paint Obama as an effete closet socialist, not a radical muslim."
Then why does she keep using the word "terrorist"?
Here is a fictional story to show how whites' hypersensitivity to the word "racist" is clouding their judgment and allowing people to walk all over them.
A non white guy, who also happens to be somewhat unsavory, wants to date Older White Guy's teenage daughter. OWG tells unsavory guy to take a hike. The unsavory guy attacks back calling OWG a racist. How should OWG respond? He responds by saying, "Oh, please, please, no. Please do date my daughter. While you are at it, you can date my other daughter too. In fact, here is the PIN to my bank account. Please don't call me racist". He really should have asked unsavory guy to take a longer hike and jump off a bridge. But he is so guilt stricken with even a hint of any possible racism that even the mere mention of it shuts off his brain.
The attack is not accurate, but in and of it self does not seem to be racist. However, when the character attacks progresses to an "all American, white beauty pagent winner" stating she is afraid of Obama and the a member of the crowd responds with "kill him." Then the racial overtones are grossly apparent, especially when the speaker (Palin) does not address the issue by stopping her speech to rebuking the comment - but instead continues to inflame the crowd. Sorry, but the scary thing I see hear has nothing to do with Obama's casual aquaintance with an old radical hippie!The scary thing I see here is condoning violence!
Sorry to rain on your parade, Palin-crowd haters, but the "Kill Him" line NEVER HAPPENED:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/10/no_one_ever_said_kill_him_abou.asp
(Disclaimer: I'm not voting for McCain, but I detest the way certain lies tend to get spread.)
Palin uses here retarded baby as a propaganda tool and Mccain won't make the 5 year mark, f@ck them both, lying scum, full of sh#t and losing this campain to a brother.
calling him a socialist in the context in which the republician party is using it is racist. no the word it self is not racist, but if you use it in the context that they have been it truly is. it is this big sentiment that he is going to be helping out the blacks who are on welfare (hence the obama bucks appearance in the newsletter incident), and them there black people with the lack of education and their ignorance is going to take over (hock and spit). i was once told by a professor that the more education that a white person gets the less prejudice he becomes and the more education a black person gets the more prejudice he becomes. i challenged this statement then and i challenge it now, because i feel like the more education a white person gets the more they learn about "buzz" words that they can use to preach to each other their hate. no all whites, but honestly sit back and tell me that this presidential race has not been a what is good for mccain and palin is not good for obama/biden. it is okay for palin to insult obama but the minute he says something in return he becomes that typical black man that is a sexist and has no respect for women. it is okay for palin to bring up ayers but where is the mention of palin and joe volger, thomas muthee, brickner or mccain and us council on world freedom and moonie, or gorden lidey (wink at palin) or even . and how is it ALL of palin's mistakes are someone else's fault. the media, katie couric, everyone except dear ole sarah. she is out of her league, she is a racist, and both her and joe the plummers 15 minutes is up. they should both just go home. Joe is a liar and he is using this campaign to forward his personal agenda and palin is doing the same. do you know why oreily's ratings are down, because he has nothing good to report...if palin and mccain is what the republician party has to offer, i am not buying. if obama does not have experience, palin must be in diapers. one of my coworkers put it best when she had her first baby she had never baby sat or had a child before, but in the words or palin she got in there and did it and did a wonderful job. no president that was originally running for office had experience in the job before they won. what makes obama different...he's black and we are suppose to be ignorant and dumb. stop voting based on your racial fears and you may see that this country really can. it is so funny how obama talks about the issues and answers questions both directly and intelligently, and you look at how palin and mccain answers and you get fluff either around the subject or on a totally different subject and you say you don't know or trust obama. palin can't even tell you what newspapers she reads or what the vp job is. also, she is upset because tina fey portraits her using her own words....they did not change one word in the couric skit and she is upset because she was properly quoted...OMG. come on people mccain is running a campaign on injuries and name dropping....he is like 50 cents still telling the story he got shot 9 times....okay we got it you were a prisoner of war...we respect that, but that does not qualify you for a presidency. mccain friends are jumping ship like there is a hole in the floor, and there is him and palin. he doesn't have a clue of what he will do except make the rich richer with his trickle down theory. if you are servicing a car you don't pour the oil on top of the engine to keep the vehicle moving you put it in the engine. our economic engine is the middle class. we are the ones spending the money and providing most of the labor, so in order to keep the economy flowing you pump it into the middle class who will spend. rich people stay rich by investing and saving their money not by spending. middle class has to spend to survive. duh!!! I look at palin rallies and I swear it is a nascar Klan rally. she misstated it is not the gloves are off and the heels are on. it is the gloves are off and the hoods are on. vote mccain/palin but just be honest as to why you are doing it. don't call a cat a dog, call it a cat which is what you are.
sorry to rain on you parade tara but you need to reread you article. it did not state for a fact that it did not happen it just gave opinions to the fact that they did not believe it happened. duh.