26. august, 2008
Er det denne form for “change”, som Barack Obama har lovet de amerikanske vælgere? Washington Post kigger nærmere på hans nyudpegede vicepræsidentkandidat, Joe Biden, og dennes støtte til Irakkrigen.
Obama has declared time and again that he had the judgment to oppose the invasion of Iraq from the very beginning, despite political winds that gusted toward war. McCain, Obama says, did not. … In the days that led up to the vote on the war resolution, Biden and McCain stood together on the Senate floor, sometimes fighting against each other, sometimes fighting in tandem. They teamed up to shoot down an amendment by Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) that would have forced Bush to seek further authorization before an actual invasion. … But in Biden’s closing remarks before the war vote in 2002, he also voiced a remarkable degree of trust in Bush. “The president has argued that confronting Iraq would not detract from the unfinished war against terrorism. I believe he is right. We should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time,” he said. “. . . I am absolutely confident the president will not take us to war alone. I am absolutely confident we will enhance his ability to get the world to be with us by us voting for this resolution.” In the end, Biden and McCain both voted for war.
Apropos: “Ekspert: Obama valgte den mindst destruktive partner”, 180Grader.dk.
7. august, 2008
Når jeg ikke har skrevet meget om den amerikanske valgkamp, er det fordi jeg har svært ved at blive begejstret for hverken McCain eller Obama. Hysteriet om McCains agrebs-reklamer er meget symptomatisk.
McCains kampagne har lavet en række klodsede reklamespots om Obama – den mest omdiskuterede er reklamen, der sammenstiller den demokratiske kandidat med Paris Hilton og Britney Spears, omend denne her er min personlige yndling. Men i stedet for at kritisere disse reklamers totale mangel på indhold, har Obama og hans støtter valgt at tolke dem som racistiske angreb.
Michael Moynihan fanger stemningen godt:
In a web-only column, The New York Times editorial page charged that the ad was a “racially tinged attack” like the one that “ran against Harold Ford, a black candidate for Senate in Tennessee in 2006. That assault, too, began with videos juxtaposing Mr. Ford with young, white women.” The American Prospect’s Ezra Klein huffed that the McCain campaign is “running crypto-racist ads.” Bill Press, former co-host of CNN’s Crossfire, proclaimed that the “Celeb” spot was “deliberately and deceptively racist.” Polk Award-winning blogger Josh Marshall wrote that “the McCain campaign is now pushing the caricature of Obama as a uppity young black man whose presumptuousness is displayed not only in taking on airs above his station but also in a taste for young white women.”
The online hyperventilation quickly passed through to the Sunday chat show circuit. If this wasn’t dog-whistle politics, said Democratic strategist Donna Brazile on “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” then “why not use Denzel Washington or Bono?” (Brazile is a frequent decoder of subterranean racism, having previously accused former President Bill Clinton of being racially insensitive for calling Obama’s view of the Iraq war a “fairy tale.”) MSNBC’s perpetually outraged host Keith Olbermann inveighed against the “almost subliminal racism, a black man with two women.” When the video briefly flashed Berlin’s Victory Column on the screen — where Obama addressed 200,000 adoring fans — New York Times columnist Bob Herbert saw a “phallic symbol.”
Tjek også Niels Westys indlæg om emnet på Punditokraterne.