Friday, August 01, 2008
|
|
"Racially Tinged"? The New York Times Demonstrates Why It Is Bleeding Money
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
12:15 AM
|
The McCain ad smacking Obama for his "all hat, no cattle" resume has generated a lot of controversy, but the New York Times' assertion that the ad is "racially tinged" tells you everything about the Times and nothing about John McCain.
No American with a brain seriously thinks John McCain would ever approve a "racially tinged" ad, and the attempt to smear McCain as a racist will backfire on the Times and Obama. There's lots to object to in McCain's record whether you are left, right or center --my writing throughout last year detailed the objections of conservatives-- but the idea that Senator McCain would ever countenance an appeal to base instincts will be instantly rejected by voters left, right and center. McCain's been around a long, long time, and voters know him. He's an honorable man, as honorable a man as has ever run for the office. The paper's credibility (and profits) have never been lower, but this sort of absurd attack proves you can indeed fall off the floor. Even as other MSMers are waking up to Obama's many flaws, the Times endorses the pathetic playing of the race card by Obama, and proves that the most elite of elite media is not merely biased towards Obama. It is owned by him.
"Dollar Bill" Obama had a bad few days and reflexively appealed to race, and not for the first time. ("And did I mention, he's black?") Because racism is immoral, the attribution of it to a person innocent of the charge is a slander, and Obama has slandered John McCain and a lot of people as a result. This will not sit well with voters who have deep reservations about the inexperienced, untried "citizen of the world" peddling pompous rhetoric to Europeans while skipping out on meetings with wounded troops. John McCain's "energizer bunny" campaign excites very few people even as it reassures millions, and Obama's impulse to self-destruct should not be under-estimated. Perhaps a majority of Americans still understand that we remain at war with a committed and ruthless enemy, and that sending in a rookie who can't even handle a hard-hitting television ad is not exactly the best bet for the country's safety.
|
|
|