Wednesday, July 09, 2008

The Obama campaign manufactures more faux outrage

Tonight's "Hannity and Colmes" undoubtedly garnered some relatively high ratings. The highlight was video that caught Jesse Jackson whispering a seemingly backstabbing accusation: "See, Barack been, um, talking down to black people on this faith-based. I wanna cut his nuts off."

Jackson, of course, had to apologize. How ironic: his backtrack proved he has no balls of his own. Doesn't he have the moral fortitude to stand by his words, as private as he thought they were? Ha, well we are talking about Jesse Jackson, aren't we? What moral fortitude?

Call me cynical or even crazy, but from the very first time I saw the video, it just didn't feel right. I think the slip-up was manufactured. Yes, I believe it was completely fabricated.

Greta Van Susteren, on her show immediately following, pointed out that Jackson is a veteran of TV, including experience as an anchor on CNN, and so he should have known that there can always be a live mic somewhere. That only bolstered my belief that it was all set up. Oh, the news coverage is real enough, but I can't shake the suspicion that it was deliberately done. This was also caught during a break in taping, and from all his TV and radio appearances, Jackson should know that recording rarely, rarely stops. Especially when you're taping, it's far easier for an engineer to let things roll, rather than stop it for a break and risk forgetting to restart. Then look at how far apart Jackson was sitting to risk making a confidential remark, and how clearly the whisper was picked up. Surely Jackson would know how sensitive microphones are. You can speak very naturally and soft-spoken in the studio, and sound just fine.

But method and opportunity aren't enough. There must be motive also. So why would this be done on purpose? Simple: to give points to the Obama campaign, which is having trouble attracting undecided voters, and particularly a lot of Clinton supporters who may never forgive Obama for taking the nomination away from their queen (and don't forget the important Clinton donors who might not give at all to Obama's campaign).

A while back, I said I'd talk about "the faux 'outrage,' the spectre of 'racism,' that the Obama campaign is creating." What could be better than a major black leader being perceived as Judas for betraying the Obamessiah under his breath? It turned out that Jesse Jackson made a "What do you mean it was caught on tape" remark and had to fall on his sword, which is just as well. He has too much baggage to have a high-profile position. Sharpton is controversial, but with his "loyalty" to stand up for Obama here, it might get him a position in the Cabinet. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development?

It's the Obama campaign that has to make things a race issue. A while back, I reminded us that Bill Clinton was so misquoted and misconstrued when he said, "This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen." He was talking about nothing else but the myth that Obama has been consistent on Iraq (whether opposing the war from the beginning or withdrawing U.S. forces immediately). Even now, as Charles Krauthammer so thoroughly documented, Obama is a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry ever was. Tony Blumer at Newsbusters had an excellent piece showing Obama's flip-flops and self-contradictions just on pulling out of Iraq.

But how did Obama's campaign spin Clinton's comments? Suddenly there was "outrage" that Bill Clinton was so cavalierly dismissing the possibility of a black man, oh pardon me, an African-American man, becoming for president. That post was mainly to talk about Geraldine Ferraro, who was forced to resign after speaking the plain truth: Obama wouldn't have gotten this far were he not a black man.

As a black man, Obama can play the race card, taking great pains not to make it obvious. There's never been a presidential campaign like this before, with a generic response to try to deflect all criticism, and make it appear the fault of the critic. Recently, Wesley Clark made some incredibly idiotic remarks about John McCain's military service, and Obama quickly distanced himself from the comments while praising McCain. How convenient, don't you see? A campaign friend or advisor can "independently" make criticisms Obama otherwise couldn't, and no matter what Obama says, any damage is still done. But the race card has been the Obama campaign's dirtiest trick all along, especially in feeding on enough "white guilt" by insinuating that people are racist if they don't vote for him. I always thought that the civil rights movement was about what Martin Luther King Jr. said, judging people by the content of their character, not their skin. So why are Obama supporters constantly the ones who make things into a race issue, by acting as if every criticism of Obama is because he's black? Why must the mainstream media constantly remind us that he would be the first black president? Which isn't true, you know, because his mother was white.

The Obama campaign has manufactured additional faux outrage over "attacks" on Michelle Obama. The woman has the right to free speech, and if she hasn't been proud of her country until now, that's her right to believe so and speak her mind. But there is no such thing as an immunity from criticism, because that would be to stifle others' freedom of speech and thought. Moreover, it's certainly reasonable to expect that people will form an opinion about a wife who has very much inserted herself into her husband's campaign. So the real problem with the Obamas isn't whether they're proud of this country or not, finally proud or always proud. The real problem is that they're charlatan elitists who act "outraged" over criticism of who they are and what they've done, things they bring upon themselves, and over things that didn't happen.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home