Like many who oppose John Lewis politically, I hate to write something negative about the man because he is a legitimate hero of the Civil Rights Movement. During the 1960s, Lewis paid a physical price for marching for civil rights. In Selma,Alabama, he was nearly killed during the famous march at the Edmund Pettis Bridge. As a congressman, I have never heard a whiff of any scandal surrounding Mr Lewis. Like Thurgood Marshall, a Supreme Court justice that I often disagreed with, Lewis is an important and honorable icon of the Civil Rights Movement. For that, he deserves respect.
Having said this, I have to take issue with Lewis' comments this week about the McCain-Palin campaign-comparing it to George Wallace and the hate and fear the late segregationist Alabama Governor caused. (In his final years, Wallace repented his past and asked African-Americans for their forgiveness. Last night, Lewis said his remarks were "misinterpreted".)
Lewis' concern centers around recent McCain appearances, where some citizens voiced angry comments about Obama. Some were legitimate while others were out of line. ("Traitor", "off with his head", etc). McCain, to his credit, admonished those who crossed the line enduring boos from his own audience for doing so. One middle-aged woman called Obama, "an Arab", at which point, McCain took the mike from her and corrected her.
Aside from the clearly unacceptable comments I mentioned above, I am unaware of any of McCain's supporters using racial epithets against Obama. I still maintain that Republicans have not been guilty of race-baiting in this campaign. The only persons who have been guilty of that were the Clintons-and Wright, of course. Not surprisingly, we are hearing statements from the left claiming that an Obama defeat will mean that Americans are racists. I disagree. Criticizing Obama's relationship with Jeremiah Wright is legitimate. The only race-baiter in that controversy was Wright.
If McCain hopes to win this election, he needs to hammer home the things that have come out about Obama (with no help from the mainstream media). Wright we already know about. The public needs to hear more about William Ayres, Tony Rezko and ACORN. No doubt, any talk about ACORN will bring forth cries of "racism". Nonsense. As we speak, we have a large, nationwide organization that is trying to rig an election through fraudulent voter registrations in state after state after state. Not only has Obama workd with them extensively in his community organizing days, but now we learn that the Obama campaign sent $800,000 to ACORN.
I thought presidential campaigns were trying to receive money-not give it out. What were they buying?
But I digress. Congressman Lewis was wrong to compare the McCain-Palin campaign to George Wallace in any manner. He should apologize to both of them.
6 comments:
Funny, I was just about to write an entry regarding what happened at those Palin/McCain rallies.
Personally, I don't believe that McCain is promoting these ideas, and he definitely showed some class when he corrected that one woman.
However, I have to wonder where this kind of fear is coming from. Honestly, I think that a lot of right-wingers are to blame. They've mastered the cynical way of saying things without directly saying them. I'm referring to every pundit who keeps saying "Barack Hussein Obama" over and over again. They're playing a little game where they're playing on the fears of people, and then when asked why they're doing that, they act like children and say, "Well, that's his middle name!"
I do blame Palin a bit for this as well though, as she's engaged in one of these cynical little games when she talks about Obama "palling around with terrorists." Now, you know what she means by that. I know what she means by that, but let's be honest here - a lot of people aren't very smart, and they hear that little soundbite and conclude that Obama is somehow in league with the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11.
There is not a doubt in my mind that Palin is fully aware that's what's going to happen, but she gets to cover her back and say, "I never said that!" It's similar to how the Bush administration said that Iraq was responsible for 9/11 without actually saying those words.
I read your blog because you bring up some legitimate points, and you don't play the fear-mongering game. Many of your fellow conservatives are definitely not above such tactics - and they ought to be ashamed of themselves.
And another thing, things like some of McCain's attack ads, like the one about Obama's relationship with Ayers, is deliberately misleading to anybody who doesn't know the full facts of the story. It makes it sound like Obama was involved with the guy while Ayers was an active terrorist.
Again, they don't actually say it, but they're playing a cynical little game where they know that those who are less informed will make exactly that conclusion.
Compliments will get you everywhere, Lance. Maybe a free Kitzmann someday.
Seriously, though. There are uninformed voters on both sides (though I would argue more on the left).
When Palin uses the term "terrorist" to refer to Ayres, she is accurate. Ayres participated in the bombings of the Pentagon, Capitol and NY Police HQs. In addition, he is unrepentent to this day. If someone thinks that the terrorist Palin is referring to is some Al-Qaeda member then they are just plain dumb.
As for Obama being a Muslim, I agree that we need to let go of that one.
What's even scarier (to me) is the educated people in this country who follow the news and consider themselves well-informed-and they hardly know about Ayres or ACORN. Why is that? The only explanation is that they get their news from National Public Radio or the msm, which won't tell them about it.
It's really sad that you can get news faster off the blogs and internet. It may not be accurate-but either is the msm. For two weeks, I was telling my colleagues at UCI about John Edwards and they had no clue what I was talking about.
I told my cousin tonight (who wasn't well-informed about ACORN-and is voting for Obama that she needs to research ACORN before she votes on Nov 4 (I should have said Nov 5-LOL).
If someone thinks that the terrorist Palin is referring to is some Al-Qaeda member then they are just plain dumb.
But people are that dumb, Gary - and Palin has absolutely no problem with dumb people making those kinds of conclusions so long as the result is that she and McCain get the votes.
The thing is, the whole Ayers thing is a lot more nuanced than "Obama pals around with terrorists" and even you have to admit that.
Lance,
Ayres may not be a terrorist now, but he is still a far-left radical in his efforts to radicalize education in the schools (Woods Foundation-Annenberg Challnge) and his connections with Chavez in Venezuela. He is just working within the system in a legal manner now. Obama's association with Ayres shows that he was involved in far-left radical activities in the 1990s.
As dumb as those folks who buy the arguments that Republicans want starve children and throw old ladies out on the street?
Post a Comment