Obama, McCain and the Uhurus: Who's playing the race card and why media fumbles the question

One reason why Barack Obama's people may be having so much trouble refuting John McCain's claim that Obama's is unfairly playing the "race card," is because the criticism was so politically astute.

McCain's campaign has lately seemed trapped in its own gaffes, from seeing CBS News save the senator from his own mistakes and confused statements, to watching Obama welcomed in Europe like November's elections were just a pesky formality.

But on Thursday, McCain came up with an argument which sounds reasonable to all those independent voters who may like the idea of voting for a black candidate who thinks like they do, but are wary that Obama will magically turn into Al Sharpton just before the inauguration. It's also an argument which has the added benefit of snarking off liberals and black people:

By anticipating attacks on his race, Barack Obama is the one playing the race card.

This was also an astute realization of the first rule in modern political campaigns: Don't attack an enemy where he's weak, attack him where he's strong.

So if Obama's strength is that he's a black candidate who can't be attacked for his race, you turn that against him by attacking his attacks on people who might attack him about his race.

Obama's problem is that McCain has distanced himself so effectively from outside groups and advisors who have even hinted at race-based attacks, that the Republican can complain about the implication that he might stoop to such levels. Of course, those attacks have happened anyway -- especially the perpetuation of this myth that Obama is Muslim -- so McCain can benefit from the attacks while complaining about Obama's defense.

This also extends a tactic we saw Hillary Clinton's people use much more ham-handedly in the primaries -- advancing arguments designed mostly to give those already uneasy about voting for Obama a non-racial excuse for voting against him. If history is any judge, you can expect these attacks to get less subtle as the campaign goes on, particularly if McCain's poll numbers don't move.

Cable news has played into this attack by recycling it endlessly during the day, along with footage of the Uhuru protesters challenging Obama at Gibbs High School. Anyone who knows this St. Petersburg-based socialist black nationalist group knows that Obama would have to be to the left of Stokely Carmichael to win their approval, but the cable channels have played footage of their protest continuously to suggest Obama may face a rift with black voters. Watch Obama supporters shout them down here. Watch a Uhuru member ask a question of Obama here. (please ignore the pro-GOP rhetoric embedded with the clip)

Consumers might expect journalists to add some perspective and information to these events so their impact can be fairly judges. But I'm betting many journalists -- especially those on cable TV news -- will prefer to wallow in the controversy of the moment, leaving the public once again wanting for reports which might present a substantive, evenhanded take on what's happened. 

Comments

[independent voter]

Hi Eric, thanks for responding. I know you can't control what Obama supporters say and do... and I hope you know I was not insinuating that you scream at anyone.

I was just explaining what's happened to me so that you understood my statement about McCain defending himself. My point is that with some Obama supporters, it doesn't matter if you can articulate what policies you disagree with-- they just start calling you names. And that's very troublesome.

I agree with you that we need to be more introspective and really question our motivations. I challenge myself whenever I'm not sure why I reacted to something in a particular way.

For example, one afternoon I was mowing our lawn. My 8-year-old daughter was playing outside and had gone around to the back yard. I suddenly saw a car in our driveway (which is behind the house) and a young, black man got out and was talking to her. I hustled over right away to see what was up-- at the same time, my next door neighbor walked over too as he was on the side of his house and saw the man pull in and talk to my daughter.

The young man told me he was looking for his lost puppy. Then he went on to tell me it was actually his son's puppy..and this long, elaborate story about how he got the dog from an elderly lady and how his son lives with him now because the child's mother doesn't want him. And who his best friend was growing up (we moved to this small town 2 years ago, most people know each other) and that he went to school in Florida for a while, his grandmother left him a lot of money, and on and on and on.

I told him to give me his phone number and if we saw his dog I'd call him. 20 minutes after giving me his phone number, he finally left.

I was a little un-nerved by the experience and I did question myself as to why. I asked myself, if a young, white man pulled up and started talking to my daughter, would I be concerned? Yes, of course I would; probably even more so. If he were a kidnapper/child molestor, he'd be more likely to pass himself off as a relative.

Then I asked myself what was it about this experience that bothered me so much.. and I did ask myself, if it was a racial issue.

Obviously, like any mother I was concerned that a man approached my child. And what really set off my alarm bells was that he divulged way, way, way too much personal information.

Why would you reveal relationship issues, financial windfalls, and other personal informaton to someone you just met; especially if you only stopped to find out if they'd seen your lost dog? When my dog's gotten loose, I might ask people if they've seen him, but I don't stand around telling them my personal business for 40 minutes.

The puppy story bothered me too- I've always told my daughter never to help a grownup search for their 'lost' pet. So I talked with my daughter about what happened. I asked her if there was anything suspicious about it. She told me 'grownups don't need kids to help find their lost dog!' I asked her if anything else seemed strange. She said he stayed for a really long time.

I explained to her that usually, when people give you that much information about themselves they're trying to win you over and put you at ease. Often so that you let your guard down because they may not have good intentions. And I told her my unease with the situation had nothing to do with his skin color (please note that when I asked her what was suspicious, that was not one of her answers). It was that he was a stranger and he seemed determined to have a long, very personal conversation.. and that's a red flag for trouble (particularly for women and children). Anyway, I truly did question myself for a while after that happened. I talked it over with some of my friends (of various races) and they all agreed they would have been suspicious too for the same reasons I was.

So anyway Eric, I believe in constantly challenging myself. I also believe in actually having a meaningful discussion about why people feel the way they do vs. automatically labelling people. That's gotten us nowhere good in the past and it certainly isn't taking us anywhere positive in this day and age.

Thank you for your honesty and for engaging in this discussion.

[Billy]

Since Obama's experience consists of a whopping 143 days in the Senate, before he decided he is worthy to be president, how can we really know his policies anyway? He has NO track record to speak of. We have a right to question his words because he has had no actions to back them up.

He's not running for dog catcher. This is too important a job to treat him with kid-gloves.

[Eric Deggans]

I don't scream racist at people who oppose Obama policies. I can't do anything about others who do.

But I do also ask that people who say they oppose Obama's policies actually articulate the policies he has that they oppose. Sometimes, people can't do that -- they really oppose Obama for a different reason.

Again, i don't know that even that is racial. they may just have general problems with a liberal candidate for president. But it's tough to sort through all the racial baggage we have as a people -- and sometimes you have to challenge yourself to look hard at why you're reacting the way you do -- as I do with myself...

[independent voter]

"Obama's problem is that McCain has distanced himself so effectively from outside groups and advisors who have even hinted at race-based attacks, that the Republican can complain about the implication that he might stoop to such levels. Of course, those attacks have happened anyway -- especially the perpetuation of this myth that Obama is Muslim -- so McCain can benefit from the attacks while complaining about Obama's defense."

Eric, so you don't think McCain should be able to defend himself against these accusations? I think it's perfectly acceptable for him to fight back when Obama keeps saying 'they're going to use race' as if McCain is the one doing it. If Obama is entitled to defend himself, McCain is too.

I feel strongly about this because during this election, I've been called a racist. For the first time in my life. Why? Because I don't agree with Obama's ideologies.

Yet the people who said that knew nothing about me other than I disagreed with some of Obama's policies. They don't know that my best friend in elementary school was black. Or that my closest friend at work is black and I love her dearly and trust her with my life. Or that I have black relatives. And hispanic relatives.

Racist is an accusation I don't take lightly. And please, don't tell me I'm defending myself too much. I'm just p**sed. Really, really ticked off. I've always thought everyone is created equal; it's what you do with yourself; your character, and your integrity that matter.

But many of Obama's minions scream 'racist' at anyone who disagrees with his policies. We see things Obama's way or we're racist. Period. I don't agree with the Global Poverty Tax. So, now I'm racist. I don't agree with some of Obama's proposed business taxes. Racist again. I don't agree with all of Bush's faith-based initiatives--so when Obama talks about expanding them, and I don't like that, you guessed it. I'm a racist.

I think Americans are used to the ugliness between democrats and republicans during election cycles. But the jabs have deteriorated into a hate-spewed free for all, in part because those who aren't voting for Obama are automatically derided as illiterate, redneck, members of the KKK. And then the ignorant backlash and vitriolic responses fly. (I admit, the hate-speech originates on both sides.)

I would happily vote for a black president if I supported the majority of his/her policies. I have voted for black candidates for other offices. I just don't agree with most of Obama's policies.

For the record, I don't support most of McCain's policies either. But apparently, I'm allowed to do that since we both look white. Then again, maybe I just hate senior citizens. Yup. That's it. I'm racist *and* I hate seniors. Rotten elderly.

[calebism]

Uhuru has given Obama a net gain, for various distasteful reasons. McCain's campaign won't be able to live up to the supposedly higher standard he is now defending in the face of falling support; he will go increasingly nasty as desperation increases. Extra points for the Stokely Carmichael name check.