The Democratic nominee scorned the "prejudice and bigotry and hatred and
division" on display in the Arizona senator's campaign. As for his own
platform, he said that "we will do all these things because we love people
instead of hate them. ... Beware of those who fear and doubt and those who
rave and rant about the dangers of progress."
This wasn't last week, but 44 years ago. The Republican from Arizona -
demonized by the Democratic and journalistic establishment - was Sen. Barry
Goldwater. The Democrat, of course, was LBJ.
There are differences between then and now, to be sure. For starters, there
was still a great deal of work left to be done on civil rights in 1964 (and
John McCain is no libertarian). But even then, the attempt to paint
Goldwater as a hatemonger was idiotic and dishonorable. It was almost as
dishonorable as Harry Truman's attempt 16 years earlier to cast his
opponent, businessman Thomas Dewey, as an American Hitler.
Liberal Democrats have a long tradition of tarring opponents as the
monolithic forces of hatred and prejudice while casting themselves as the
enlightened proponents of peace, love and decency. And this election shows
that tradition is alive and well.
Over the weekend, Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, a civil rights hero, sold off
another chunk of his reputation by coughing up some absurd partisan talking
point about how the McCain-Palin campaign reminds him of that of Dixiecrat
segregationist George Wallace. And over the last week, a host of reporters -
not just liberal pundits - ominously fretted that the McCain campaign's use
of former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers as an issue is a racist ploy. The
Washington Post's Anne Kornblut, for instance, wrote that Sarah Palin's
comment that Barack Obama was "palling around with terrorists" is "a turn of
phrase that critics said was racially loaded."
The most laughable evidence that McCain is sowing hatred stems from the
shouts of "terrorist!" and "kill him!" from a few hothead buffoons at McCain
rallies. Of course, rather than foment this sort of thing, McCain went out
of his way to chastise his own supporters personally and publicly.
McCain has done nothing to fuel racism. Or, put another way, the McCain
campaign has done as much to promote prejudice as the Obama campaign has to
inflame the vile passions behind the "Abort Sarah Palin" bumper sticker,
Madonna's stage video lumping McCain in with Hitler, the eugenic snobbery
aimed at Palin's son with Down syndrome, or the column in the Philadelphia
Daily News that predicted a "race war" if McCain wins.
Wait a second, shout Obama supporters. What about attempts to paint Obama as
"the other," as "different"? Peter Beinart writes in Time that the
Republican campaign is trying to cast Obama as not "American enough." Obama
is cosmopolitan and represents a changing world. To cast that in a negative
light, insists Beinart (a friend and frequent debate opponent), amounts to
"shocking" racism.
Beinart recounts how Palin said at one rally, "I am just so fearful that
this is not a man who sees America the way that you and I see America."
Beinart makes it sound as if she said this through a Klan hood. Please.
Every single presidential campaign boils down to an argument about how the
candidates "see America." Suddenly that question is out of bounds because
Obama is black?
According to the liberal history books, in 1988 the GOP cast Michael Dukakis
as too elitist, cosmopolitan and not American enough. In 1992, it ran a
similar attack against Bill Clinton - remember the hullabaloo about draft
dodging and that trip to Russia? In 2000, ditto with Al Gore, though the
emphasis was less on foreignness and more on extraterrestrialness. And in
2004, there was John Kerry's "global test" for U.S. national security. Lack
of originality notwithstanding, why is it suddenly racist to treat Obama
just like the four white guys who preceded him? Talk about racial double
standards.
Obama holds mega-campaign rallies in Berlin, touts his global appeal and
says a top foreign policy goal is to get other countries to like us. But
it's racist to call him cosmopolitan?
He has nontrivial ties to an unrepentant (and white) former leader of the
Weather Underground, a radical leftist organization that sought to kill
American soldiers, policemen and politicians. But it's "racist" to bring
that up? (If anything, by not attacking Obama's ties to the Rev. Jeremiah
Wright and other politically unsavory nonwhite associates, McCain is
self-censoring for fear of seeming racist.)
If Obama were a white Democratic nominee named Barry O'Malley, the GOP would
be going after him twice as hard. But liberal Democrats would still
caterwaul about fomenting hatred and racism, because that's what they always
do.
|