The Lynching of Barry O
Let’s be clear about the continual smears from the Clinton surrogates: “Hey, this guy is a Muslim, black, drug-dealing, madrassah-going, unelectable, scary brown Hussein — but we didn’t mean it the way you took it.”
The Clinton campaign, like any county sheriff from the Deep South in the Jim Crow era, is making this campaign about one thing: “N***er, N***er, N***er.” It’s repulsive and inexcusable. 1 To put this in context, Atrios uses a phrase “scary brown people,” when he justifiably points out some Republican appealing to racism and xenophobia. Appeals to fear conflate all of these: Muslims, black people, madrassah-attenders, brown people, various Husseins, inner city drug dealers, etc. The Clintonistas are doing the same thing right now. Every day this month.
Most Progressive bloggers, (May I say “many of my fellow Democratic Party bloggers?”) are ignoring this. I don’t know why. The Great Orange Satan has called out Hillary on this; I give him an “A.”
Steve Benen is one of the few to ask some questions, but is reluctant to connect the dots. He gets a “C+”
Bob Kerrey digs a little deeper, lobs bogus ‘madrassa’ claim - The Carpetbagger Report
Over the weekend, former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) raised a few eyebrows after an event in Iowa in which he endorsed Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Kerrey, who’s always had a reputation for pushing the rhetorical envelope with freewheeling and provocative remarks, offered some provocative comments about Barack Obama.
“It’s probably not something that appeals to him, but I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim. There’s a billion people on the planet that are Muslims and I think that experience is a big deal.”
Ostensibly, Kerrey was complimenting Obama, but at the same time, he was subtly hitting right-wing points, emphasizing Obama’s middle name and family lineage. Whether one perceives this as a cheap, underhanded shot depends entirely on whether one is willing to give Kerrey the benefit of the doubt. (I couldn’t help but find it a little odd, though, that Kerrey knew, off the top of his head, that the senator’s “paternal grandmother” was Muslim.) Was Kerrey trying to raise an issue while pretending not to raise it?
Matthew Yglesias calls it for what it is. He gets a B+.
Many/most of my “fellow Progressive” bloggers, complicit in their silence, get an “F.” (I’ll be happy to update with a link to other bloggers calling this for what it is.)
I sincerely do not know why they are so accepting. It’s easy for conservatives to say “Aha, they are a bunch of hypocrites.” I do not know. And, I have no interest in a comment-debate about who’s the bigger hypocrite or what kind of retribution George Bush should face, blah blah blah. I’m not trying to score righty-lefty points here.
Why are so many Progressives looking the other way on this?
Update:
Jill Tubman really and truly calls it for what it is. A+
Joe Gandelman didn’t fall off the turnip truck yesterday.
John Cole doesn’t like it.
Scott Lemieux sees racist dog-whistle attacks against potential Presidential candidates in your own party.
- Precisely why they are doing it, whether to appeal directly to racism, or perhaps to show how tough they are, as I suggested yesterday, or even for some other reason, is irrelevant. They are taking this shot. [↩]
Maybe Bud Selig can close his eyes
Guest Bloggers
Well, now. This is a complete travesty.
Hirabah, not Jihad
A few good links