That’s from an Associated Press opinon piece, which dissects Gov. Palin’s comments that Barack Obama goes “palling around with terrorists.” “A deliberate attempt to smear Obama,” the AP sniffs. Okay, well, fine. I think reasonable people can disagree on whether Sen. Obama’s relationship with ex-Weatherman William Ayers is or is not at the palling-around level, or whether you can still call him a “terrorist” or what have you. But - and there is no getting around this - Ayers is a white guy. So what makes this comment “racially tinged”?
Palin’s words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism.
Yes. This could be because they’re not racist. But the AP explains further:
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?
Well, don’t keep us waiting, Associated Press, just tell us already. (And who says it’s “false”? Obama worked for Ayers and socialized with his family, Ayers was a small-scale terrorist in the Sixties, what’s false about it?)
In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers’ day 40 years ago.
Okay. So I hate terrorists. I hate terrorists big-time. I vote Republican because I hate terrorists, and Republicans want to kill terrorists, whereas Democrats seem to be a little wishy-washy on the issue. This, according to the AP, makes me a secret closet racist. Not to mention you.
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.
But that’s not what Palin said. She’s not the one going out and saying that Obama is a Muslim. (Compare to HRC, when she said Obama was a Christian as far as she knew, and how that went over.) Nobody has ever, to my knowledge, tied McCain-Palin to overt or covert efforts to question’s Obama’s religion.
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.
What she said was that she didn’t think Obama saw America the way conservatives see America. What’s wrong with that? What’s racist about that? And you gotta admit, when you hang out with people who admit to having bombed the Pentagon and the Capitol, I think — I could be wrong — that it’s legitimate to question your viewpoint about some things.
The fact is that when racism creeps into the discussion, it serves a purpose for McCain.
A bit of a logical fallacy here. The fact that racism may benefit McCain does not mean that McCain is fostering racist attitudes.
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.
The Wright thing came up, if you remember, in the primary - it was the pro-Clinton part of the MSM that gave it life. And the idea that the “unresolved arguments about America’s promise” comes from pestering Sen. Obama over his past associations implies that the only way to resolve such arguments is not to pester Obama - or to not stand in his way of getting elected. And, thereby, QED, it is per se racist to vote for John McCain.
You’ll get to hear a lot more about this in the next few weeks, I imagine.