My view: whoever brings up Ayers loses. People are worried about their 401ks and their jobs.Basically. I think McCain stepped into it on this one. People are giving him praise for holding back on Wright, but that's just smart--it's in his interest to hold back on Wright. Excepting the neanderthals stroking their monkey dolls, no one cares. People are losing their retirement and their kids' college funds. I know some of us think of white racism as this force that trumps all. But everything I know about this country says that there is a power even greater than "The Nigras are merrryin our daughters!!" The power of the dollar. It will be our damnation--but it will be our savior first.
« Billy Dee Williams says "Jesse, step away from the mike bruh..." | Main | Churchill and McCain » Wisdom of the day15 Oct 2008 11:00 am
From Andrew:
Comments (12)Comments on this entry have been closed. |
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
This is really fascinating to me.
The whole idea that the economy has dealt a serious blow to american racism doesn't seem to follow historical precidence.
The big article in Time and posts like this keep reminding me of a lyric from Lupe Fiasco's "American Terrorist":
"Now the poor Klu Klu Man see that we all brothers.
Not 'cause things the same,
but 'cause we lack the same color,
and that's green, now that's mean.
Can't burn his cross, 'cause he can't afford the gasoline."
......precient
No your right Miguel--I've thought about how, in the past, economic peril led to race riots. But I think we've changed. Not totally, and not simply. But I do think we have changed. More on this very point in a minute.
What was the line about Atlanta - the "city too busy to hate"?
Maybe America is now a country too worried to hate.
At least most of us are. The rest will be cheering for Palin.
Economic issues that affect one's own rice bowl trump all others. I'm not sure that I see any long term unification of the masses here, but people are certainly feeling the need to pay attention to what is happening.
Given that national security is the one remaining area where Republicans still show some strength in the polls, they keep trying to frame a message that no amount of economic distress matters if you get killed by terrorists.
But moderate people are not buying it right now because against the real and dire economic news, the Ayers-terrorist connection is just so fabricated and it reeks of political desperation.
I've been waiting for Bush to pull some national security trick and he still may. But then I remember that he hates McCain. Maybe he doesn't care if he loses? No late October Bin Laden tape?
"The Nigras are merrryin our daughters!!"
Yeah, God forbid anyone should make our daughters happy.
"Economic issues that affect one's own rice bowl trump all others.'
And in the past rice bowl issues have been the fuel for racial antagonisms. But this time I can't see how anyone can blame some other race for taking jobs that don't exist in the first place.
It'll be fun watching how awkwardly McCain tries to shoehorn Ayers into the debate. There must be betting action on when he brings it up and if it's at all pertinent to the question. Schieffer may feed it to him, recall how he told General Wes Clark that getting shot down automatically qualifies one for higher office.
No your right Miguel--I've thought about how, in the past, economic peril led to race riots.
Hasn't the opposite occurred as well? In the sixties, there was a growing economy, at least for white america, yet there were race riots. I know it was far more complicated, the white liberal establisment passed a bunch of laws and seemed to think they cured the problem when they only scratched the surface.
For McCain, I think he is pulling a bluff. I thought he did this before in another debate. He can hint at bringing it up, then when he doesn't, his people can say he was being a statesman addressing the important issues of the day. Though I could be wrong.
If you were to use the last presidential election as a basis for comparison, though, the Wright attack might not be a bad move. After all, 2004 was a base election--the independents weren't as critical. Bush/Rove won because they got the base out in unprecedented numbers, so if you assume that an attack using Wright will motivate them, then it's not a bad strategy.
Ah, but here's the difference. The Republican base has shrunk in the intervening years thanks in part to the economy and also to the many other ways in which the Bush administration has screwed up, and the Democratic base has swelled. Those attacks will still work to motivate the base, but the base isn't enough to win this time around.
The real reason McCain can't bring up Wright has nothing to do with people not caring (though the not caring part is true). His campaign just spent the last two weeks convincing their base that Obama is secretly a Muslim extremist bent on destroying the United States from within. He very well can't come out now and claim that Obama is dangerous because of his CHRISTIAN former pastor.
It doesn't matter that Wright has said some really ridiculous stuff in the past. He's without question a Christian, and to say that Wright is one of the most influential people in Obama's life (he's not) shows that Obama is Christian as well.
For the first time all campaign, McCain's team seems to have thought something through before acting... If voters become convinced Obama is a Christian, this thing is over. That 10 point lead in the polls will look like a tight race compared to the eventual landslide.
I hope McCain does bring up Ayers.
I don't buy for a second that Obama isn't ready to tackle the Ayers issue. Him and Biden made a pretty deliberate point to go straight at McCain with the "say it to my face" angle. I think they were just laying a trap and McCain is about to walk straight into it.
Obama has the clear advantage on this. He can keep his cool under fire and McCain can't. McCain can fire attack after attack at Obama, and Obama will respond with his normal poise and then even crack a smile or giggle. McCain can't even hide his disdain for Obama during the opening handshake.
As Sullivan pointed out in an article, Obama is a master at baiting an opponent into a mistake. I really think this will be yet another example of that.
"Hasn't the opposite occurred as well? In the sixties, there was a growing economy, at least for white america, yet there were race riots."
Doug, the economy was indeed growing, even in the South after so, so long, but that hadn't really settled in and become the psychological reality for any Southerners, white or black. The southern states were basically trearted like colonies after the Civil War, right down to using the corrupt ruling class rather than rooting it out, and the colonial mentality lasts for generations after colonialism (formally) ends. so basically, white Southerners still felt poor and vulnerable.
"I know it was far more complicated, the white liberal establisment passed a bunch of laws and seemed to think they cured the problem when they only scratched the surface. "
And may even have increased the problem, although there was no other way to resolve the problems than by intrusive federal legislation. I can't speak for the people on the recieving end of all that violence, but I have never heard much complaint from them on the federal government's actions or the consequences.