- Share This Post
- submit
- 38
-
Sparkle (0)
The presidential contenders are racing to prove how much they love the Jews, just scan the news articles from today. Here is Obama, questioned by Tim Russert at last night’s MSNBC debate whether he would denounce Louis Farrakhan’s endorsement:
SEN. OBAMA: You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments. I think that they are unacceptable and reprehensible. I did not solicit this support. He expressed pride in an African-American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can't censor him, but it is not support that I sought. And we're not doing anything, I assure you, formally or informally with Minister Farrakhan.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you reject his support?
SEN. OBAMA: Well, Tim, you know, I can't say to somebody that he can't say that he thinks I'm a good guy. (Laughter.) You know, I -- you know, I -- I have been very clear in my denunciations of him and his past statements, and I think that indicates to the American people what my stance is on those comments.
He expressed pride in an African-American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can't censor him, but it is not support that I sought.
Blogger Taylor Marsh knows how things work: “It's really simple. You don't go near anyone like Louis Farrakhan.” Ann Althouse dissects Obama’s clever parsing here:
“Clearly, this is a failure to reject Farrakhan. It's extremely clever, but don't be fooled by the cleverness, which was hard to catch in real time. He's creating the space for Farrakhan to operate separately, bringing him support. Farrahkan didn't coordinate with the campaign in any way. Fine. That wasn't the question. Farrakhan has said some good things about Obama, and Obama doesn't want to say I don't accept support from this man. He talks about the nonissue of censoring him. Of course, Obama can't make Farrakhan stop, but he can do what Russert asked him to do: Say that he rejects the support.”
Obama should have firmly denounced Farrakhan. Instead he sounded a bit weasely. Hillary Clinton promptly schooled Obama on how things are:
I just want to add something here, because I faced a similar situation when I ran for the Senate in 2000 in New York. And in New York, there are more than the two parties, Democratic and Republican. And one of the parties at that time, the Independence Patty, was under the control of people who were anti-Semitic, anti- Israel. And I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. I said that it would not be anything I would be comfortable with. And it looked as though I might pay a price for that. But I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory and untrue charges against either Israel or Jewish people in our country.
Some say the episode is reigniting tensions between Jews and the African American community that hearken back to Jesse Jackson and "Hymietown." Others say Russert was irresponsible and baiting Obama; Josh Marshall called it "Russert's lowest moment."
I'm asking myself, what does Obama’s non-denouncement of Farrakhan say? I see it as a sobering moment in our Obama ardor: the first hint of politician-speak. Is Obama unwilling to alienate certain African American voters (although which ones support the Nation of Islam, I don’t know) while clearly being scared to alienate another linchpin of the Democratic Party, the Jews?
Lord, we’ve been here before. This conflict only gives the GOP and right wing more ammunition against Obama, and I hate to see Obama ducking and trying to have it both ways. He should have denounced Farrakhan, because of Farrakhan’s record of hatred and anti-semitism. Now Obama will have to grovel before the Jewish community too, and get lost in more explanations.
When Louis Farrakhan endorsed Barack Obama this week in Chicago Clarissa Pinkola Estes noted:
Minister Farrakhan’s endorsement aside, in the US, a political endorsement of one candidate over another, is understood, by some, as an absolute command… for the ‘congregation’ to vote for the endorsee
…. rather than just a prominent person simply saying, “This is what I personally think.”
Endorsements are still seen as tribal exhortations to the masses. And perhaps they are, often enough.
No matter who the Minister's “masses” might be, when it comes to a hate-mongerer like Farrakhan, Obama can't have it both ways.
