As the presidential campaign has become darker and more negative, I've limited my statements of judgment to a few friends and immediate family. I am loathe to add anything more incendiary to the public domain. I've watched clips of Sarah Palin telling the almost--99%-- all-white crowds in Michigan and Ohio that Barack Obama is not "one of us," that he "doesn't see America like we do," and I've been exceedingly disappointed by the few conservative voices lifted in protest. Instead, what we've all heard are people yelling "Kill him!" and "Terrorist!"
The people at these rallies are angry. They're angry at the "mainstream media" for asking Palin questions. Palin whips up resentment with her whining of the way she has been "treated" (interviewed, gasp!) by the mainstream media. At one rally, people began yelling obscenities--and racially-tinged comments--at the reporters present. I've watched all of this with disgust and a little bit of fear. Why are these people so angry? The people they support, Republicans and conservatives, have been in power for years; the Democrats won the House and Senate only two years ago. Before that, we had six years of Bush and before that a Democratic President but a Republican legislature. And more Republican leadership previous to Bill Clinton. Why aren't these white people angry with Republicans who have been running the country all of these years? Why are they so angry with Barack Obama?
George Packer has a recent article in The New Yorker about Ohio's working class. Descriptions of the prevalent racist attitudes toward Barack Obama are an important part of that article. Too many white people won't vote for Obama because he's black. Read the article: "The Hardest Vote." It has been particularly dispiriting to see John McCain use this resentment in his rallies. While he isn't responsible for the anger and almost mob mentality at these events, he is responsible for not counter-acting it. I agree with George Packer's post today on his blog, Interesting Times:
Palin is too shallow to understand the weapon she’s playing with; she’s just thrilled to be the birthday girl and the object of so much semi-erotic devotion. But McCain knows better. His manner in debates and at rallies tells me that he’s conflicted about the forces his campaign is unleashing. Win or lose, he’s already damaged his cherished reputation beyond repair. But there’s still time for him to show leadership and do what’s necessary. The responsibility lies with him.
However, I think Sarah Palin is equally responsible. She's not standing in the pulpit of her Assembly of God church in Alaska, and she's not just addressing the folks before her at those rallies; she's addressing the nation. And the nation, I hope, has the good sense to reject her message with a winning vote for the man who very much is "like us," like America: Barack Obama.
Update:
- Who else is responsible for the angry mobs? Fox News, evidently, according to Jonathan Stein.
- Steve Benen has a post about conservatives who are supporting Barack Obama. Christopher Buckley is one.
- And, another hat tip to Steve Benen, read Publius' blog on Obsidian Wings. I can relate.
- Also check out this post of Josh Marshall's at Talking Points Memo: "Weird. Sad. Surreal."
3 comments:
Dana Milbank made up half the stuff in that article. Read this and know the truth. Stop believing what the in-the-tank-for-Obama media tells you. It's just not true.
You do not provide any evidence that Dana Milbank "made up half the stuff in that article." The only thing Milbank describes that some people say they didn't hear was someone calling "Kill Him" from one of the rallies in Minnesota. (And one of the reporters Leo relies on admits that he wasn't near enough to hear what others might have heard.) There have been plenty of eyewitnesses to other scary stuff happening at those rallies: obscenities yelled at news reporters, racially-tinged comments yelled at an African-American news cameraman, among others. Other people have gotten comments from people standing in line to attend those rallies. The comments made there are rather disturbing, too. I read John Leo's column; Leo either does not know about or disregards the other evidence.
And it's not just Democrats warning of Palin's stoking hate; it's not just Democrats who are concerned with the way the McCain campaign is trying to paint Obama as "other" and "dangerous." David Gergen, advisor to several Republican presidents and contributor to the senior Bush's 1980 presidential campaign, has publicly discussed his concerns with the tactics of the McCain campaign. Christopher Buckley, writer for the conservative National Review and son of the founder of The National Review--William F. Buckley--has announced that he will be supporting Barack Obama. Other supporters of John McCain have expressed dismay that the John McCain on the campaign trail is not the John McCain they knew.
Your own language indicates your reflexive response when you write "in-the-tank-for-Obama media." That's pure Fox News-Sarah Palin- Talk Radio speech. The media has long been supportive of John McCain. No one on the right complained then. It's only recently, as the John McCain the media thought they knew has morphed into a John McCain they do not recognize, that the media has begun to ask tough questions of McCain and his campaign advisors.
Also, do you really think that reading one article by an opinion columnist will provide "the truth"?
One clip I saw of the angry crowd McCain was addressing showed McCain, almost under his breath, saying "He's a good, decent man," presumably about Obama, but it was almost as if McCain couldn't allow himself to speak out to the crowd honestly and loudly.
It's very sad how American politics can change people, can turn them into cowards or bullies. It's power that does it, of course. I am sincerely hoping that Obama can resist its allure and maintain a clearer perspective without bringing doom on himself from the corporate government rulers.
Post a Comment