• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Propertius on “Pet Peeves”
    Ga6thDem on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    Propertius on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    Beata on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    Beata on “Pet Peeves”
    Beata on “Pet Peeves”
    Propertius on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    William on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    HerStory Repeating on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    Beata on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    William on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    Beata on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    jmac on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    Beata on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    jmac on The Welcome Escape of a M…
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    September 2022
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • Top Posts

Sarah Palin is one of us now

Yep. She’s a racist, because she criticized Barack Obama. The AP says so.

By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is “palling around with terrorists” and doesn’t see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign.
And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.

Yes, AP writer Douglass K. Daniel has determined that Palin is making a “deliberate attempt to smear Obama.” But is it a smear if it’s true? If Barack Obama announced his candidacy for the Illinois state senate at the home of former Weathermen Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, and Obama worked with Bill Ayers in two different foundations over a period of years, and his opponents point out that he is friendly with them; is that a smear or is it simply a statement of fact? And what, pray tell, makes this statement “racially tinged?”

I’ll let Douglass K. Daniel of the Associated Press explain it all for us.

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.

Well that’s about as clear as mud. Talk about a circular argument! First Daniel reads between the lines of what Palin said and decides that when she said the word “terrorist,” she really meant to imply that Obama hangs around with “dark-skinned, radical muslims.” Daniel apparently thinks that Americans are too stupid to know who the Weathermen were because it all happened {gasp!} 40 years ago. And then he makes Palin responsible for internet rumors that she never mentioned or even hinted at in her speech. Finally Daniel completes his sophomoric “analysis” by arguing that Obama should never be “forced to abandon issues to talk about race.”

Guess what? Palin never came close to referring to race in her speech. Why on earth should Obama have to address race in response? In fact I didn’t see any mention of race in his campaign’s response to Palin.

So now Palin is being hounded by the media and called a racist because she said something Barack didn’t like. Because he’s special. He’s supposed to get a pass on anything unsavory in his biography, while at the same time he is free to lie about his opponents. It’s perfectly all right that Obama implied that Sarah Palin is a pig, because…because…

I don’t know. Because the press and the power structure have anointed him as the inevitable next President? This is bulls&$#t!!  And I’ve had just about enough of it in the past year to last me three lifetimes.