Schizophrenia On Race At The Times

Times columnist Bob Herbert is utterly race-conscious and attuned to any and every hint of racism.  Here he is on the Obama's debacle with Jeremiah Wright:

Senator Obama has been thrown completely off his game by a combination of political attacks (some fair, some foul), a toxic eruption (the volcanic Jeremiah Wright was a gift from the gods to the Clintons and the G.O.P.), and some pretty serious self-inflicted wounds.

...

However one views the behavior of Bill and Hillary Clinton — and however large the race issue looms in this election, and it looms large — there can be no denying that an awful lot of Mr. Obama’s troubles have come from his side of the table. The Rev. Wright fiasco undermined the fundamental rationale of the entire Obama campaign — that it would be about healing, about putting partisanship aside, about reaching across ethnic and party divisions to bring people together in a new era of cooperation.

It’s hard to continue making that case when the candidate’s spiritual adviser is on television castigating America and scaring the hell out of at least some white people. Senator Obama did his best with his speech on race in Philadelphia, but the Wright story has extremely muscular legs. It has hurt the campaign far more than Mr. Obama’s comments about guns and religion in San Francisco.

As an aside, is it true that Wright's message that the US government created the AIDS virus to kill blacks only scares white people?  I would think would-be leaders such as Bob Herbert or Barack Obama would denounce this nonsense and promote the truth; per this 2006 RAND study, the AIDS conspiracy theory costs black lives.

Bit I digress; it seems fair to conclude from Mr. Herbert's discussion that Wright is a legitimate and important part of the Obama national conversation.  [And Obama himself apparently told Fox News the same thing.]

Yet here are the Times editors, on the same day, hacking away at the North Carolina ad linking Wright, Obama, and two candidates for the North Carolina governorship:

Manipulative. Shameful. Race-baiting. Those are the only words to describe a new television ad from the Republican Party running in North Carolina that attacks Senator Barack Obama as “too extreme” for the state.

...The ad is built around the well-known video clip of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. — Mr. Obama’s former pastor — declaring “God damn America.” We have said before that we find Rev. Wright’s oratory racist. And we have criticized Senator Obama for waiting too long to denounce it. His relationship with the Rev. Wright is undeniably a liability for his campaign.

But that’s not what this ad is about. The assertion that Mr. Obama is “just too extreme for North Carolina” is a clear bid to stir bigotry in a Southern state. The ad’s claim that its target is actually two Democratic gubernatorial candidates who endorsed Mr. Obama is ludicrous.

Hmm, that "well-known video clip" of Wright declaring "God damn America" has never been reported in the news section of the paper of record.  It has appeared, if I can rely on the Times own search engine, in columns by Maureen Dowd and Bill Kristol, and in the current editorial.  "Lots Of The News That's Fit To Print (All The News That Fits The Narrative)".

Leaving us where - Wright is an important part of the Obama story, but we can't actually quote him directly without engaging in race-baiting?  That's ridiculous, and is the political version of the soft bigotry of low expectations - Wright is an educated and articulate man but we can't hold him accountable for his views because, well, it's a black thing.

Or maybe "Too extreme for North Carolina" is code for "Too black for North Carolina".  Says who?  Why couldn't it just as well be code for "Obama wants to take away your guns!"?  That is at least as plausible.

Ann Althouse and Allahpundit have more, including a link to the ad itself; Ed Morrissey has context for "God DAMN America" (and it sounds better for Wright as just a soundbite).

Comments

[Elroy Jetson]

Rev. Wright is fair game. That is the bottom line. He will continue to be fair game unless he decides to apologize for all the racist, anti-American sermons he's spewed, and retired quietly to the $1.6 million house the parish is graciously building for him.
After all, that is what the black Jesus would do.

[J. Peden]

It seems that the Times Editors think a guy like Barack Obama who ascribes to an overtly racist Black Liberation Theology, which also touts Africa as the only valid homeland for American Blacks, would not be "too extreme" as an American President.

No surprise there.

[Topsecretk9]

Wright is an important part of the Obama story,

Just like "Bill-capades" is an important part of the Clinton story, right TM?

Two. Tango.

Sorry, but I just know that we have not heard the last of Bill's pecker.

[M. Simon]

Top,

We are very fortunate that both Dems have Weathermen in their political forecasting Department. I predict cloudy and lots of rain.

Ayers is a gift from both of them.

Yipeeeeeeeeee.

[JM Hanes]

Even though it's not precisely on point, this piece from Colbert King over at the Washington Post certainly deserves a moment of ridicule. He wasn't disturbed by the outcome in Pennsylvania or the fact Hillary managed to raise doubts about Obama's electability:

No, for me, the unpleasant tone that lingers is the exit poll in which 1 in 10 white Pennsylvania voters said a candidate's race mattered. Those voters went with Clinton by a proportion of 3 to 1.
.....

It suggests that whether a tax-cutting, fiscally conservative African American Republican named Swann or an Ivy League-educated, upwardly mobile black Democratic U.S. senator named Obama is on the ballot, some whites, as Rendell warned, can't get past his color. And that's the case although black Pennsylvanians have historically and consistently marked their ballots for white candidates.

The fact that 90% of blacks apparently haven't gotten past Obama's color this time around, creates nary a ripple in the cosmos. Compiling absurdities, he tosses out the canard about Rendell sharing a podium with Farrakhan, though not to castigate Rendell, of course:

But consider what the Clinton camp and the media have put Obama through because of Farrakhan's unsolicited endorsement.

Did Clinton demand that Rendell "denounce" or "reject" his association with Farrakhan? Did she condition her cooperation with the governor on his distancing himself from the Nation of Islam?

I think Colbert has got his buyer and his seller a little confused here. LOL! Can't you just imagine how much Hillary charged Rendell for the privilege of being associated with her campaign?

[M. Simon]

JMH,

It is amazing how there are no Black Racists in America™

[syn]

The people who see racism in the ad are those who are racist.

[clarice]

It's a standard leftist thing, isn't it to charge racism or whatever other ism at hand to foreclose discussion of a topic that hurts their side.
Wright said more that is outrageous--like claiming the US govt INJECTED Blacks with syphillis at Tuskegee. While the studies go both ways on the issue of whether the AIDS and Syphillis fairytales are keeping Blacks from willing participation in clinical studies, my guess is they have. In any event, what emotional and political harm is caused by repeating such lies! (I noticed on the Tuskegee story not even O'Reilly called it for the outrageous lie it is.)

[J2]

Wright is at this moment the most powerful person in American politics. He will torpedo Obama's candidacy at the time and place of his choosing.

[Danube of Thought]

No literate person can be the least bit surprised by any of this--it is all in the boldest type in the playbook. It was predictable and predicted.

We're not just going to have a "national conversation" about race. We're going to have a presidential election about race. It can't be avoided; it is not the fault of anyone in particular; and in the end it is not good news for Barack Obama. Not because the US is a racist nation, but because one hell of a lot of voters are sick and tired of being told that it is, and that they themselves are racists. They are sick of it now, and by November they are going to be extremely fed up with it all.

And when it's over we're going to be lectured about the fact that Obama lost because of racisim. Never mind that he's a shady, lightweight fraud with not a single act of political leadership in his resume--it's all going to be put down to racism.
That's what we're in for.

[Danube of Thought]

I haven't yet watched today's Fox News (but I have it on tivo), but here's part of Ed Morrissey's take on it:

"His final gaffe — and one that may make a few Republican commercials — came when Wallace challenged Obama to come up with real examples of bipartisanship and compromise on tough issues. He claimed he would have supported the partial-birth abortion ban if Congress had included an exception to protect the mother’s health, which would have been used as a dodge around the ban in every instance. Other than a single vote on tort reform, he could come up with no example of a time when he bucked Democratic leadership.

"The most hilarious point came when Obama tried to claim credit for bipartisanship on the John Roberts confirmation vote — not because he supported Roberts. He voted against Roberts. However, Obama wanted credit for defending the few Democrats who did support Roberts on Daily Kos, and taking the venom of Kos’ readership for his defense. That’s bipartisanship — standing up to the Kos Kiddies? If that amounts to an act of courage for Obama, it tells you how bipartisan he will be prepared to be as President."

[Jane]

I just saw the interview, which made little news. He hedged on his 28% capital gains tax while invoking his buddy Warren Buffet again. He's worried about the 527's and will consider public financing if they prohibit them, but he's got something up his sleeve. He will keep Petreaus but change the mission. DOT covered the rest above. He came across well, albeit an empty suit.

[Jane]

Oh and even while he said he stood up to the Kos "kiddies" (I like that) he was pandering to them at the same time, while saying absolutely nothing of substance. empty suit.

[clarice]

Who's going to prohibit 527s? The Dems have blocked appointments to the FEC, haven't they? There is no quorum to act and it's not likely there will be one in time. Even if they relented and the posts were filled, the new appointee would take time to resolve the iossue and the losers would tie it up in court until years after the election.

What a crock!!

[Jane]

BTW, and not to suck up all the bandwidth, I was at a meeting last week. The big Dukakis/Clinton/Kerry democrat in the room assured me that MA democrats are very racist and won't vote for a black man.

When I reminded him that Deval Patrick won by 70% of the vote he said it was an aberration and they didn't know what they were doing.

My jaw dropped.

[Jane]

So he wants to feign opposition to the 527's so he can claim he was "swiftboated".

SInce in my book "swiftboating" means to tell the truth, I look forward to it.

Wallace should have asked him about constantly taking McCain's words out of context, altho I'm not sure how you do that.

[sbw]

Obama can't denounce Wright without revealing the more devastating underlying truth: Obama never believed Wrights rants, but calculated the political advantage of appearing to local voters to belong.

Obama believes what it is politically necessary to believe. As a political opportunist of the first order, for Obama to denounce Wright, would be to expose himself to the world.

[sbw]

**Wright's**

[Pofarmer]

I think you're being extremely charitable to Obama, sbw. Definately, he's conflicted, but, if he really wanted to win, how much popular support could he get in the American community by denouncing this stuff?? My guess is a whole bunch.

[sbw]

Pofarmer, but he calculated for then, and was surprised by now.

A person of character is not surprised because he or she acts according to principle. Obama has yet to show principle, or that he understands what principle is.

[Danube of Thought]

If he tries to denounce either Wright or Ayers now, he'll look even worse.

[bio mom]

I thought the Wallace interview was very weak. And the panel discussing it later was also pretty soft on Obama. They mainly congratulated themselves for the good interview and how well Obama looked. But I understand why they did this. They know Obama could be president and they have to have access. And they are prickly over the hits they constantly take from the left and the media about not being fair and about favoring Republicans. Sigh. Will we have anyone in the press to keep an eye on a President Obama should he win? I worry about that. And Obama would have both houses of congress as well.

[MikeS]

Some pollsters and politicians claim that people are more racist than they will admit. I think that is good! They ought to be ashamed of racial prejudices and they ought not to have the courage to spout their racist thoughts in the barber shop or from a church pulpit.

I think it is the press who is obsessed with race, rather than the candidates or the electorate. In this election, the press seems over anxious to find a racial component to every story.

On the matter of Obama's association with a racially prejudiced, conspiracy nut preacher, this is a question about Obama's judgment. It seems to fit into a pattern (thnx MarkO) of bad judgments by Obama. The Senator has associated with questionable characters from a variety of different races and ethnicities, including the Caucasian, William we didn't do enough (bombing), Ayers and Syrian (I don't know his ethnic group) Tony Rezko.

[Barry]

(I noticed on the Tuskegee story not even O'Reilly called it for the outrageous lie it is.)

I noticed the same thing. In fact, while many will ridicule the HIV/AIDS business, they won't touch the Tuskegee "experiment". I can only conclude they are clueless about what the Tuskegee study was and that it was designed to benifit black folks with syphillis. While there were some unsavory components of the study, it was clearly not intended to do damage. Apparently the malaise effecting the MSM extends to O'Reilly and other conservative journalists.

[narciso]

There was a line in Wright's speech about how " we saw different people as deficient"
and that's true, but not in the sense that
Rev. Wright intends it. Slavery was not a Western much less an American invention; however it was used to solve a 'troubling
labor problem' It was a sin because it did
indeed cut against everything we stand for.
The 'peculiar institution' wouldn't have been possible without the century's old
tribal conflicts that racked the continent.
Those more powerful oligarchs, who triumphed
against other tribal chieftains, sent their competitors to the New World. In time, they
would continue to be the ruling elites, and/or the revolutionary reformers. African Americans however, have been liberated twice, one through force of arms (600,000 in the Civil War)and later after the legal
atrocity of Jim Crow, force of law. Yet the
popular culture and much of the elite, refuse to recognize this fact; reinforcing the tribal warfare pattern in imitation of
the gangster rap culture, and preaching revolution of one kind or another. The latter is the legacy of W.E. Dubois, who holds the record for bad calls on policy;
endorsing Wilson's Confederate nationalism
over Taft, fascism and finally communism. These seem similar at first glance; but not really as Aaron Macgruder and Curtis '50' Jackson would indicate. Wright plays to the
second strain; all the while benefiting from
the 'middleclass' ethos, he deigns his congregation are not worthy

[poetryman69]

At best, Wright is a stranger to the truth. Just as it is troubling that conservatism has become a Satanic cult bent on practicing ritual human sacrifice and dismemberment in Iraq for the next 100 years, so too is it disturbing that a cult on the left thinks they can curse America and lie about it or that we are to supposed to admire them for the way they curse us. Well in that case, dm U too! And in the words of FUtus, the sitting VP, fu as well.