AP: Palin’s a racist for bringing up Ayers, or something; Update: McCain camp responds

posted at 2:35 pm on October 5, 2008 by Allahpundit

One of the clearest examples you’ll ever see of why The One seldom dirties his hands by playing the race card. Not only will his political surrogates do it for him, his media surrogates happily will, too. There were stories out yesterday about how McCain’s planning to go after him on Ayers over the next month and how Team Barry’s planning a little “preemptive” action. Here’s part of the preemption, courtesy of the AP: Mention Obama’s connection to a white domestic terrorist and you’re a racist.

“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.”…

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?

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.

Most troubling, however, is how allowing racism to creep into the discussion serves McCain’s purpose so well. As the fallout from Wright’s sermons showed earlier this year, forcing Obama to abandon issues to talk about race leads to unresolved arguments about America’s promise to treat all people equally.

Biden couldn’t do any better in his VP attack-dog role, and now he doesn’t have to. The left’s spin on this is that the two never really “palled around,” which may or may not be true (Obama supporter Richard Daley famously calls them “friends”) but in either case is beside the point. The question isn’t whether they’re “pals,” it’s whether Obama had any objection to working with Ayers until he started running for president and was pressed on the subject. He attended a meet-and-greet at Ayers’s home as a neophyte pol to help launch his career; he served, apparently without a problem, alongside him on nonprofits. Not once, to my knowledge, has he claimed that he didn’t know Ayers’s past during that time. According to Andrew Sullivan, Palin’s refusal to produce medical evidence that Trig emerged from her birth canal and not Bristol’s is relevant as a measure of transparency and accountability. Presumably, then, Obama’s sustained comfort around a degenerate whose chief regret from his mad bomber days is that he didn’t do “more” is relevant as a measure of character, particularly since Ayers wasn’t the first radical with whom The One’s associated. Or have the Obama rules now been updated to absolve him from character questions that any other politician would be asked? Hillary didn’t think so. But she’s a racist too, I guess.

Two other points. One, note the casual, blink-and-you’ll-miss-it suggestion that it doesn’t matter if the campaign’s intent is racist or not. I’ve been warning you about that since the left went nuts over the Britney ad. In a sane world, whether or not there’s racist intent behind this would be the whole thrust of the inquiry; as it is, it’s an afterthought. And if you accept the AP’s premise that the rules for Obama should be different, then they’re right — it is an afterthought. Challenge The One’s personal judgments and you’re presumed guilty, conclusively. Two, I’m not sure how to take the fact that the AP seems more concerned with Obama being falsely linked to “dark-skinned radical Muslims” who set bombs than accurately linked to a light-skinned radical leftist who set bombs. If it turned out McCain had served on a nonprofit board with someone from the Manson family, rest assured that the media’s main vein of concern wouldn’t be how Team Barry might use that information to falsely imply that Maverick’s connected to other killers. I’ve made this point before, too: Under most circumstances the left is quick to argue against distinguishing between domestic and foreign terrorists, but suddenly the AP finds those distinctions very important indeed. Is the tool who wrote this so underwhelmed by what Ayers did that he can’t conceive of how it might worry voters except in terms of making them think Obama’s a Muslim?

Lots, lots more from Goldstein. Exit question: Why bother with the Ayers stuff anyway? Isn’t there a better use of McCain’s and Palin’s time at this point?

Update: Palin’s not backing down, and neither is Team Maverick:

“The last four weeks of this election will be about whether the American people are willing to turn our economy and national security over to Barack Obama, a man with little record, questionable judgment, and ties to radical figures like unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers. Americans need to ask themselves if they’ve ever befriended an unrepentant terrorist, or had a convicted felon help them buy their house — because those aren’t smears, those are true facts about Barack Obama.” —Tucker Bounds, spokesman McCain-Palin 2008

Update: E&P makes a good point, inadvertently, in trying to absolve Obama: If The One is guilty of looking the other way at Ayers’s terrorist past, so is pretty much every other Democrat in Chicago. This isn’t an “Obama problem,” in other words, as much as it is a problem with his side not fretting overly much about youthful ’60s indiscretions like killing cops with pipe bombs in the name of progress.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7

justincase on October 5, 2008 at 9:34 PM

Yeah, and I take it very serious that this election is a turning point in that we may not be able to turn back.

BTW, Sean Hannitys Sunday special is really going into Obamas past deep. It’s more than Ayers. And he’s not pulling any punches.

hawkdriver on October 5, 2008 at 9:50 PM

BTW, Sean Hannitys Sunday special is really going into Obamas past deep. It’s more than Ayers. And he’s not pulling any punches. – hawkdriver on October 5, 2008 at 9:50 PM

Say what we will about Hannity – he’s doing the work that the Drive-By media refuses to do. Let’s hope it reverberates into the mainstream.

ManlyRash on October 5, 2008 at 9:54 PM

Well, Sean Hannity will be lucky to not get intered when Premier Obama takes over. That was a gloves off program. A good 527 on taxes that followed.

hawkdriver on October 5, 2008 at 10:01 PM

I was over at Free Republic finding out about Palin’s rally in Omaha. I wanted to go so badly but wasn’t able to. Sounds like there was a huge crowd very much at one with Palin.

The thing I loved reading about is the boos when she mentioned The New York Times, Katie Couric, etc. We’ve been voting against the crooked media with our pocketbooks for a long time but they just aren’t hearing us. I’d have given almost anything to be in that crowd saying loud and clear to our traitorous press exactly what I think of them.

Palin did right at the debate by saying she’d go over the heads of all the “filters” and talk straight to the people. Through these live streams of rallies and such, she’s doing just that, and giving the filters/twisters a little twist of the knife as she does it. I love it. Our media and our educational elite are the two most dangerous and seditious forces in this nation. We need to give them a dose of what they’ve tried to give Palin.

justincase on October 5, 2008 at 10:05 PM

justincase on October 5, 2008 at 9:34 PM

He does an excellent job of explaining the modern leftist moonbat. Very spooky video.

CC

CapedConservative on October 5, 2008 at 10:14 PM

Frankly I’m amazed that the McCain camp hasn’t been all over Chicago looking for all the change” Obama didn’t bring in his years there. Since the Obamessiah is touting Change You Can Believe shouldn’t McCain be asking why we should believe? When you investigate what he’s really done in the way of reform you quickly see that he’s done virtually zip. Why should anyone believe that change will be brought by a 47 year old man who has never brought it before? He’s waited all this time why, exactly?

Actually he did bring some change: there are now more slums in Chicago than there were before he got there. There are more people living with cockroaches and with backed up sewage than before The One arrived.

Don’t reformers usually make a lot of enemies? How come the entire good old boy network in Chicago, one of the most corrupt political environments in America, support him? He reformed the place and annoyed nobody?

The fact is Chicago was rancidly corrupt when The One arrived and it was just as crooked when he left. Some change.

Why isn’t the McCain campaign examining this?

nocomme1 on October 5, 2008 at 10:35 PM

CC at 10:14

Yeah, and for a more detailed description of the demoralization stage (Blame America First), see http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html

We’re supposed to get along with thugs without ever resorting to war.

We’re supposed to win a war without killing anybody.

We’re supposed to prevent attacks without snooping on the bad guys.

We’re supposed to accept every lifestyle and behavior but not have anarchy.

We’re supposed to enforce law but not until all the lawsuits from people who oppose the laws are settled (e.g. environmentalists blocking drilling, abortion lawyers blocking enforcement of IL’s infanticide law, etc)

When America doesn’t live up to crazy, unlivable expectations, blame America and get people to believe that democracy and the free market can never work. Then institute a major crisis. That’s what Richard Cloward wanted his communist students to do.

Richard Cloward was a sociology professor at Columbia University from 1962 (I think) until he died. Obama has refused to release his transcripts from Columbia, but as a poli sci major he would have been strongly encouraged to take sociology courses. After graduating from Columbia and working 2 years in NYC, he moved to Chicago to begin his “community organizing” – which the above article talks about.

justincase on October 5, 2008 at 10:46 PM

Richard Cloward was a sociology professor at Columbia University from 1962 (I think) until he died. Obama has refused to release his transcripts from Columbia, but as a poli sci major he would have been strongly encouraged to take sociology courses. After graduating from Columbia and working 2 years in NYC, he moved to Chicago to begin his “community organizing” – which the above article talks about.

justincase on October 5, 2008 at 10:46 PM

Excellent job of laying it all out, justincase. Keep up the good work!

techno_barbarian on October 5, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Crikey… the real dog in this hunt is Ayers w/ Obama distributing the $100M from the Annenberg Challenge fund. Where’s the line item by line item distrubtion of funds?

Sergei on October 6, 2008 at 12:22 AM

The Democrats/MSM are racists for considering Obama as a serious candidate, when his only apparent qualification is that he is black (t-y Ms. Ferraro). trl

trl on October 6, 2008 at 2:37 AM

It may have already been posted in “pages 3-6″ above, but…

here’s the link to Hannity’s 6-part series on Zerobama’s radical freinds:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_HZMD97nMw

Lockstein13 on October 6, 2008 at 6:39 AM

Oh well, might as well post it up.

csdeven on October 5, 2008 at 7:41 PM

Dude! A little help for people not following the thread real close?

Jaibones on October 6, 2008 at 11:16 AM

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?

(emphasis added)

On what basis do they assert, as a fact, that it’s a false image?

Blaise on October 6, 2008 at 12:26 PM

He may have been doing more than palling around.

He may have been working very closely with one in particular.

Seriously, there is some pretty convincing info at this link, take a look…and tell your friends.

Getting the truth out there.

Dorvillian on October 6, 2008 at 6:16 PM

The problem is the messenger. If you want to start throwing fire bombs, you don’t send out the fluffy bunny to do it.

Eh, how is this not a sexist statement? “Fluffy bunny?” As in Playboy Bunny?

Man, these people are morons.

spmat on October 6, 2008 at 10:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7