AP Analysis: McCain Running a Racist Campaign He Will Regret (Especially if He Wins)
The AP calls McCain/Palin out for running a racist campaign. The AP!
It raises an issue I have never considered. If McCain wins by race-baiting Obama, would it even be possible for him to govern? Think about it. Half the country will be enraged. African-Americans, in particular, will feel (rightly) that racism triumphed. And liberal Democrats control Congress.
In other words, in the worst financial crisis in our history, the American President would be a cipher, capable only of doing those things that he can do without Congress or public support (like fighting Iran or any other country that he doesn't like).
It would be as if Hoover was re-elected in 1932 except -- thanks to the race issue -- infinitely worse.
Advertisement
I personally don't see how attacking his association with Ayers can be considered racist.
Alot of people are worried about some of the people that Obama has been associated with. Period. It has nothing to do with the color of Barry's skin
October 5, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree in that the article really does not make a case for racism. The writer must be probing some subterrean level of racism that is not obvious as what Palin said does not convey what the writer sought to create.
Then again, perhaps it was the writer of the AP article whose own racism was tapped by Palin's remarks that created this out of left field article being a racist attack?
This dog simply does not hunt in the context of the article.
October 5, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get with the program. Any criticism of BHO is racist. Period.
October 6, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, of course, not. That's why they're darkening his skin tone in their ads. That's why they always contrast him with white faces (kids, in their repellent and demonstrably false "sex education" ad) in their unceasingly negative ads.
October 5, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, a lot of people are worried about some of the people McCain has been associating with too. Those pictures of McCain with Bush scare the living hell out of me. But it's not racist.
October 5, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
As election day nears and McCain keeps dropping in the polls I expect to see something similar to the Willie Horton ad. McCain and the people working for him are capable of it.
I can see it now, on Hardball;
Chris Matthews: So, is McCain going for the long ball with this Horton ad, Pat Buchanan?
Situation room:
Wolf Blitzer; So, is the McCain campaign playing the race card with this Willy Horton ad, Bill Bennett?
October 5, 2008 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
MiddleClassBill said;
Bill, I've heard this business about Obama's "association" with other people a number of times. Can you describe what is meant by Obama's "association" with the people mentioned?
I think the public should know if Obama robbed banks or ran a drug operation with these people mentioned, or, Heaven forbid, helped terrorists carry out their nefarious acts.
October 5, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
MiddleClassBill,
lets not forget that McCain was once "associated" with the North Vietnamese Communists.
October 5, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, let's talk about questionable associations:
October 6, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's inane, as is the AP article. How exactly is saying that Obama is pals with terrorists racist???
It seems that any criticism of Obama is being ascribed to racism, as opposed to his actual weaknesses and problems.
October 5, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it does not seem that any criticism is being ascribed to racism. Rather, it seems that this criticism is being ascribed to racism and it is a far flung stretch of the imagination to make that leap.
There could be racism but the writer fails to make the case with his analysis and it is very difficult to do because Palin's words do not convey racism. Her words convey anti-Americanism independent of race.
In other words, she could make these same anti-Americanism statements about anyone and it has nothing to do with race.
October 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
It wouldn't surprise me if Biden or Keith Olbermann called me a racist because I don't want my taxes to be raised!!!
October 5, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now, Bill, I don't believe your attacks on McCain are racist. I don't want my health benefits taxed either.
October 5, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm glad to hear you're doing so well, making more than $250,000. per year.
October 5, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
MiddleClassBill said:
If McCain gets elected he may call you for the draft, you know, to invade Iran.
October 5, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It wouldn't surprise me if Biden or Keith Olbermann called me a racist because I don't want my taxes to be raised!!!
Umm, they wouldn't call a racist over your concern about taxes. Your use of "Barry" might very well get many more than those two to call you, deservedly, a racist.
And, MiddleClassBill, unless you are single making more than $200,000 or married and making more than $250,000 per year, your concern over Obama's tax plan is unfounded.
When reading financial news, it is good to read papers in addition to Investors Business News Daily, as you invited viewers to read in this post, if you want people in the Cafe to take you seriously.
October 6, 2008 1:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
The AP article makes the better case.
Plain isn't saying 60's radical, she's saying Obama is palling with terrorists. Most people when they think of terrorists aren't thinking of old hippies, or McVeigh, they think of brown people, Muslims. I don't know if you've noticed, the Obama is a Muslim story still has legs...
"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."
Obama's different from you and I, not like one of us...
October 5, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
"We see America as a force of good in this world" Whoops, I smell a neocon.
October 5, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin doesn't have to answer for anything she says. She is in a bubble where she gets to spew whatever she wants and never be challenged. The MSM just rolls over and in the "interest of fairness," puts her crap out there as though it is valid.
Maybe we need to put a monkey out as as spokesperson who can never be challenged, who can talk about John McCain's fucked up life and his many affairs - some recent - , and Charles Keating, and his gambling, and his drug-addicted wife who is a felon (fraudulently forged prescriptions) and never even went to court over it, etc etc etc.
October 5, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ayres protested against the Vietnam War and segregation of blacks - in fact one of his first protests was demonstrating at a pizzeria for its refusing to seat blacks in the restaurant.
(Palin labelling Ayres, but not directly naming him, a terrorist is what people of her political persuasion labelled all people at the time who protested the war, or anyone critical of the government, period - think today's 'unpatriotic' label.)
Linking Obama to Ayres, an anti-segregationist, would suggest that Obama is also against segregation and (here's the leap) therefore Palin/McCain are pro-segregation and thus racists? Bit of a stretch that.
Frankly, Al Gore 'labelled' what politics has become quite well when he said, "What politics has become requires a level of triviality and artifice and nonsense that I find I have in short supply."
October 5, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ayres's other "protests" involved planting bombs at the Capitol and the Penatgon.
October 5, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nudnik said:
Nudnik, in that case I would't vote for him.
October 5, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
October 5, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nudnik, in that case I would't vote for him.
Good one!
October 6, 2008 1:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Laura Bush got drunk and killed a guy by running into him in her car. Should everyone who knows her get the shaft?
October 5, 2008 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It strikes me that the people who see racism in all of these attacks and the people who deny any racism at all are both exaggerating. With Obama-Biden clearly the stronger ticket by all reasonable standards, McCain-Palin are about to mount a viscious attack that tries to make Obama look untrustworthy and like "the other." While they won't directly attack him on race (that's a losing strategy), they will try to subtly exploit race where they can get away with it. But they'll only do it very indirectly so they can't be accused convincingly of racism. Will this strategy of trying to scare people away from Obama (as the radical black terrorist Muslim) hurt them if they win? Who cares, actually . . . It's sort of a moot point, since unless they find some other way to counter Obama, they are going to lose.
October 5, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good comments. I'd agree that is more a subtlety they are trying to imply, but it is not overall a racist attack.
Just an idiotic one.
October 6, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
It matters because every time a political party or leader goes to the well of slanderous demonization it hurts the country. It screws peoples heads up and convinces good people to do horrible things.
The republican party is a shameless monster when they do this kind of stuff.
October 5, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ain't it funny that Obama can be bashed so much about Rev. Wright, but all we hear is crickets about Caribou Barbie being ministered by a Kenyan witch doctor?
October 5, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Word. In my book, "Rapture" Palin, who has obviously not thought about anything except Alaska and religion in her life, is a whole lot scarier than ANY well-educated person whose studies and life's work have been about issues that affect our country and its place in the world.
Also, there is nothing to show Obama listening to Wright's rants; we can see Sarah standing in front of the witch doctor. She looks like an old segment of Oral Roberts: HEAL this woman! YUCK!
October 5, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
CVille said:
Exactly, Palin is Alaskacentric, she's snow blind when she leaves the state.
As to her religiosity, I have a Wiccan Tree Witch in my Sycamore, I wonder if her 'friend' could get rid of her for me.
October 5, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, nothing except his own book, in which he repeats the 'White mans greed rules a world in need' rant, and his other book which used a Wright rant as it's title. No connection other than that.
October 5, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
When Obama is President, and you have good health insurance, and we are no longer in perpetual war, and the world is working towards a way to coexist without bullying one-another, you can revisit your thoughts about Wright and decide how important they were.
The fact that you consider the title "The Audacity Of Hope" a rant, tells us all everything we need to know about you.
October 5, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
In case you missed it last week, 'White Man's greed' just got a $700 Billion blank check, while the US continues to sink in world rankings on such trivialities as infant mortality.
So sorry that Rev. Wright upsets you with his prescience. Perhaps Sarah Palin's witchdoctor can cure that for you.
October 5, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
theCleverBulldog,
I take it you buy and read Obama's books, am I right?
October 6, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be nice if elections were one big intellectual discussion with true facts and good manners, but it almost never is. What gets said in primaries and general elections are soon forgotten after the dust settles because it was all about emotion and in this case desperation.
The dirty little secret is that on the whole those who vote Republican generally have a problem with diversity and so McCain/Palin are trying to tap into that tendency because they are desperate.
The Democrats need to relax and let this dirty stuff take care of itself. Mr. Obama is one smart candidate, he knows how to take care of this and win.
We had all better start worrying about our economy and the two wars that are draining literally our flesh and blood.
October 5, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
The question of what particular alleged race-baiting has or will take place from McCain or his top surrogates aside, surely the notion that he would regret any race-baiting that leads to his victory (at least at this point apparently against the odds) is naive. Of all the things Nixon or Reagan or Bush pere or (more complexly, W Bush in 2000) surely NEVER regretted was the race-baiting that they and/or surrogates (usually and) engaged in to secure the White House.
Hey -- winning isn't everything, it's the only thing, and race-baiting a grand old Repuglican tradition to boot. (As we saw in this election, it isn't entirely a GOP monopoly either, but they are "market dominant")
October 5, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be as if Hoover was re-elected in 1932 . . . . M.J.Rosenberg
He was!
"[P]ractically the whole New Deal was extrapolated from programs that Hoover started." Rexford Tugwell, leftist member of FDR's Brain Trust.
October 5, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, let me say this: If the polls remain as they are, or go farther for Obama and he "loses" it won't matter what label is put on it. I don't think Americans will tolerate yet another stolen election.
Did anyone