Race Card

Race Man by Sean WilentzHow Barack Obama played the race card and blamed Hillary Clinton.Post Date Wednesday, February 27, 2008
After several weeks of swooning, news reports are finally being filed about the gap between Senator Barack Obama's promises of a pure, soul-cleansing "new" politics and the calculated, deeply dishonest conduct of his actually-existing campaign. But it remains to be seen whether the latest ploy by the Obama camp--over allegations about the circulation of a photograph of Obama in ceremonial Somali dress--will be exposed by the press as the manipulative illusion that it is
Most of the recent correctives have concerned outrageously deceptive advertisements approved and released by Obama's campaign. First, in Iowa, the Obama camp aired radio ads patterned on the notorious "Harry and Louise" Republican propaganda from 1993, charging falsely that Senator Hillary Clinton's health care proposal would "force those who cannot afford health insurance to buy it, punishing those who won't fall in line." In subsequent primary and caucus campaigns, the Obama campaign sent out millions of mailers, also featuring the "Harry and Louise" motif, falsely claiming that Clinton favored "punishing families who can't afford health care in the first place." A few bloggers and columnists, notably Paul Krugman in The New York Times, described the ads as distorting, but the national press corps mainly ignored them--until Clinton herself, seeing the fraudulent mailers reappear in Ohio over the past weekend, publicly denounced them.
The Obama mass mailings also attempt to appeal to Ohio's labor vote by claiming that Clinton believed that the
American Free Trade Agreement, signed in 1993 by President Bill Clinton, was a "'boon' to our economy." More falsehood: In fact, Clinton had not said that; Newsday originally applied the word "boon" and has now noted the Obama campaign's distortion. In this campaign, Clinton has called for a moratorium on all trade agreements until they are made consistent with labor and environmental standards--and account for the effect on jobs in the United States. Obama makes a big deal about how Bill Clinton signed NAFTA. But he fails to mention that, within the councils of her husband's administration, Hillary Clinton was a skeptic of free trade agreements, and as a senator and candidate she has said that NAFTA contained flaws that need to be rectified. Ignoring all that, the Obama flyer features an alarming photograph of closed plant gates, having no connection to any action of Senator Clinton's, as well as the dubious quotation about her from Newsday in 2006. Newsday has criticized "Obama's use of the quotation" as "misleading ... an example of the kind of slim reeds campaigns use to try and win an office." Obama, without retracting the mailing (and while playing to protectionist sentiment in the party) said only that he would have his staff look into the matter--long after the ad has done its dirty work.
Misleading propaganda is hardly new in American politics --although the adoption of techniques reminiscent of past Republican and special-interest hit jobs, right down to a retread of the fictional couple, seems strangely at odds with a campaign that proclaims it will redeem the country from precisely these sorts of divisive and manipulative tactics. As insidious as these tactics are, though, the Obama campaign's most effective gambits have been far more egregious and dangerous than the hypocritical deployment of deceptive and disingenuous attack ads. To a large degree, the campaign's strategists turned the primary and caucus race to their advantage when they deliberately, falsely, and successfully portrayed Clinton and her campaign as unscrupulous race-baiters--a campaign-within-the-campaign in which the worked-up flap over the Somali costume photograph is but the latest episode. While promoting Obama as a "post-racial" figure, his campaign has purposefully polluted the contest with a new strain of what historically has been the most toxic poison in American politics.
More than any other maneuver, this one has brought Clinton into disrepute with important portions of the Democratic Party. A review of what actually happened shows that the charges that the Clintons played the "race card" were not simply false; they were deliberately manufactured by the Obama camp and trumpeted by a credulous and/or compliant press corps in order to strip away her once formidable majority among black voters and to outrage affluent, college-educated white liberals as well as college students. The Clinton campaign, in fact, has not racialized the campaign, and never had any reason to do so. Rather the Obama campaign and its supporters, well-prepared to play the "race-baiter card" before the primaries began, launched it with a vengeance when Obama ran into dire straits after his losses in New Hampshire and Nevada--and thereby created a campaign myth that has turned into an incontrovertible truth among political pundits, reporters, and various Obama supporters. This development is the latest sad commentary on the malign power of the press, hyping its own favorites and tearing down those it dislikes, to create pseudo-scandals of the sort that hounded Al Gore during the 2000 campaign. It is also a commentary on how race can make American politics go haywire. Above all, it is a commentary on the cutthroat, fraudulent politics that lie at the foundation of Obama's supposedly uplifting campaign.
_______________________________________
Even Paranoid People Have Real Enemies
Gina Nahai

I'm not one of those women who see a male-dominance conspiracy at every corner. And I understand that Hillary has baggage, while Obama doesn't (never mind that's because he hasn't been around long enough or done much). I realize that he's taller, younger, more charming than she, and that the American people tend to vote for the taller, younger, more charming candidates. I'll confess readily to being a Hillary supporter -- because she's smart, and tough, and the most qualified of the two; because to get to where she is, she's had to be at least twice as smart and tough and dedicated as any man. But I can't believe anyone could watch last night's debate and not come away with the conclusion that the Hillary camp is right when they say that the press goes out of its way to give her a hard time, and again goes out of its way to give Obama a free pas
Just one example, and then we can move on: that NAFTA question. The aggressive manner in which Tim Russert kept interrupting Hillary as she tried to say that she would renegotiate NAFTA instead of opt out of it. Then the same question is posed to Obama, and he gives the same answer -- to a word -- with only one gentle interruption.
OK, one more: all the "this is what Hillary has said about you, how would you respond?" questions. Was this a debate, or a "let's give Obama free air-time to answer the attack ads"?
And let me tell you, I do think she's getting this treatment because she's a woman. I don't believe Russert would give himself permission to use that tone of voice with a male candidate, or to interrupt him as many times.
And I also think the reason many Democrats have gone over to Obama's side is because he's not a woman. His positions on major policy issues are very much like Hillary's. He has less experience and an obnoxious wife (remember Theresa Heinz Kerry?). And yet people (men and women -- this is the sad part) say they're voting for him because he has more charisma, or because they "just don't like" Hillary, or he's more electable. I think much of that "charisma" is in fact Obama's "maleness". Or, rather, Hillary's femaleness.
So what? You say. What's wrong with electing someone with charisma -- no matter what the source of it? So what that the press and the media happen to like Obama more than they like Hillary, and therefore give her a harder time?
So Republicans voted for GW, in spite of his lack of experience, because he was more likable. Look where that got us.
And the press gave GW a free pass for an eternity because they were either trying to curry favor with him so they wouldn't be locked out of the White House press room, or they found his jokes funny and were amused by the nicknames he had for each of them. Look where that got the press -- and us.
All you Obama-voting Democrats out there who think you're smarter than the Republicans who voted for Bush or gave him a free pass, take heed.
The truth is, I don't know if Obama can beat McCain, or what kind of president he would be if he were elected president. I do know that voting for someone because of what he sounds like or looks like is what's brought this country to where we are at the moment: behind countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, India, and Liberia where the electorate has been enlightened enough to choose the more qualified candidate -- even if she is a woman.