Was John McCain playing the race card when he referred to Barack Obama as "that one" in Tuesday's presidential debate? Obama's campaign and its echo chamber in the media surely want us to think so. Within seconds, the campaign was sending out e-mails to reporters drawing attention to the phrase, and the media were quick to take up the charge.
The New York Times' Maureen Dowd somehow claimed that the phrase is "a cross between 'The One' and 'That Woman,'" and meant as a subtle warning to whites that they "should not open the door to the dangerous Other," namely a black man. CBS' Jeff Greenfield said, "Those two words are going to be what the water cooler conversation is tomorrow." Calling race "a particularly toxic issue in this country," NPR's Michel Martin asked a guest, "Do you think that race is becoming part of this campaign?"
This faux racism charge is as offensive as it is off base. McCain's somewhat un-artful reference was born of frustration that Obama has managed to avoid criticism for his pork-barrel spending, even when it benefits the superrich. McCain was referring to a 2005 energy bill that included huge breaks for the oil companies, which Sen. Obama supported and Sen. McCain did not. If race played any role in this calculus, it is the unspoken assumption that because Obama is both black and a liberal, he is immune from suspicion that he would ever do anything to benefit rich white guys.
Throughout the campaign, Barack Obama has tried to have it both ways on the race issue. As long as he thinks he's safely ahead and no one has the temerity to criticize him, he's the post-racial candidate who refuses to be defined or constrained by race. But when he's being challenged in any way — say, by bringing up his 20-year relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright or his troubling association with Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers — his supporters, if not Obama himself, are quick to claim racism must be the motive.
The Associated Press claimed Oct.
5 that vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's reference to the Obama-Ayers connection "carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret." Racially tinged? The Weather Underground were mostly over-privileged, white radicals from the '60s who tried to blow up buildings, including the Capitol and the Pentagon, and killed one policeman and maimed another in San Francisco. Obama has some explaining to do about his relationship with Ayers, and crying "racist" won't stop legitimate inquiries into whether Obama has been honest about how closely they worked together over the years or what Ayers' role was in launching Obama's political career.
There are some real racial double standards in this campaign, but they seem to favor Obama, not McCain. If Obama were a white candidate who attended a church whose pastor regularly inveighed against blacks and accused them of plotting to kill whites, would he have become the Democratic nominee for president? Would he have been able to get away with a speech in which he said he could no more disown his pastor than he could the white community or his own grandmother? And how would it look if he abandoned this association only after the pastor began attacking him?
If Obama were white, would he have won more than 90 percent of the black vote in the Democratic primaries? And without that overwhelming support from black voters, could he have secured the nomination? That is not to say that Obama is not talented and appealing on his own. But his race has been more a plus factor than a negative one to date.
It remains to be seen, what, if any, role race will play come Election Day. But crying racism over every perceived slight or personal criticism is more likely to cause a backlash than it is to win a single extra vote for Obama.
Linda Chavez is the author of "An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal." To find out more about Linda Chavez, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
|
 |
Comments
|
6 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
For more about this kind of race baiting, visit stopdogwhistleracism.com. We cover the good, bad and ugly from the left, right and center about race in the race.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Ludovic
Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:52 AM
|
|
|
|
In answer to your rhetorical question "If Obama was white....." the answer is: the question is racistand race baiting. Have a white day.
Comment: #2
Posted by: liz
Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:49 PM
|
|
|
|
Ma'am;...I am certain that if Jesus Christ were to suddenly show up in America as a black man a lot of people would as suddenly find themselves looking for a new faith. The thing is, why should Mr. Mccain have to remind people that Mr. Obama is black? He already has those votes. He already has the votes of the fearful, the uncertain, the prejudiced and bigotted. What he really needs is a reason to vote for him that the hard core republicans haven't yet exploited to the hilt. Blacks are not equal in this country, and they stand in the way of equality as much as we. But the republicans have made certain that the poor have paid for what equality blacks enjoy out of their own rights. The blacks have gained, and the poor whites have lost. And it is this group the democrats have lost in turn. So, yes; I agree that Mr. Mccain is playing the race card. Even to say Mr. Obama is black when he is only half black and all American is an injustice. But upon injustice is republican victory predicated...Thanks....Sweeney
Comment: #3
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:49 PM
|
|
|
|
Ma'am;....Back in the seventies, when I was a socialist and a revolutionary, I often heard, more times than I could possibly count, to Love it or Leave it. Forget about Mr. Obama not thinking America was perfect enough; I knew America was not perfect at all. From the point of view of a flea every dog is a perfect dog. From the point of view of the dog, no life is perfect if the number of parasites is only limited by the span of life. From one end of life to another, one has to support parasites. Some will be honest and keep dual citizenship. Some only believe America is perfect because it provides no protection for the old, the infirm, the young, or workers of any color... This could be much better. This could be much better and yet, not be perfect.... Idealist seek perfection, and toss humanity because they are not perfect. Still, government ought to defend the many from the predations of the few. Government ought to seek our common thread and keep us sewed up and one people. You have had your revolution, your Reagan revolution. It is not the left alone that looks at this country as less than perfect. The right has a laundry list of change it would like. I don't blame them for being wrong, and I hope they don't blame me being right. Both sides need change, and what they miss is that they cannot have change and have everything they consider just ducky for them remain unchanged.... Forms, like marriage, like states, like government, like society are built to resist change. The relationships within forms are change itself. I did not make this fact true. It is just true, and look at all your relationships and you will see this is true. There is no ideal form of relationship. The form of relationship we call the United States was formed with serious flaws stitched over, and they blew up into a war at a later date. Apart from the flaws of the constitution, which resulted in the loss of millions of lives, and that was a question of property rights, it was not property rights that was questioned as a whole, but one fraction of the problem. Property rights, which caused the civil war was strengthened rather than diminished by the war. We are going into a period when property rights are going to cause great strife, and will have to be reconsidered... Do you believe Mr. Obama will stand with me, or with you? Do you think William Ayers will stand with me, or with you? The fact is that you can run down change, but your side needs it too. You can build up the picture of Mr. Obama as a bomb throwing black panther, but I think he has establishment written all over him... America does not need to fear Mr. Obama. It has a date with destiny now that all its chickens are dropping dead. When we need a functioning government able to reach the goals it has stated for itself, perfection is not more acceptible than out right failure. Perfection is the enemy of humanity. The ideal is our enemy. Show me a working government, and I will give up on revolution....Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #4
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:59 AM
|
|
|
|
Debra Saunders seems to be missing a point in her article. Blacks always vote for a democrat in large numbers
Usually around 90%
Comment: #5
Posted by: Joop Breeschoten
Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Oh please.
For anyone paying attention, the Rev. Wright issue was already discussed at LENGTH in the primaries. The reason it went away was because people got sick of hearing about him...I think the fact that you believe Wright is a relevant issue says more about you than Obama.
Oh, and please forgive those of us who have been referred to by some whites (don't want to blanket them) as "boy" "that one" "those people" in very deroggatory ways. I don't think McCain meant anything sinister by it, but if I cannot claim to know McCain's motives in making that statement, then neither can you...so your statement about him saying it because Obama got a "free ride" in the press is debatable.
And just like ANY voting bloc, blacks vote for the person who addresses issues important to them (not to assume that we all don't share common interests also). If republicans did better outreach in black communities, or even gave a sh*t, maybe they'd get more black votes. Maybe if they didn't try to disenfranchise poor black voters, blacks would be more open to the republican party.
Comment: #6
Posted by: MB
Mon Nov 3, 2008 9:41 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
