A shameful Obama smear — this one from the mainstream media February 28, 2008 Jill This time around, the attack comes from Tim Russert. Josh is right — it is the MSM version of email smear campaigns. Obama handled it with grace, but damn if I don’t want to kick reporters sometimes.
Oh my god, I’m so glad to see the progressive media picking up on this. I was instantly disgusted by the line of questioning, and by the time it got to the stage of “the title of your book is taken from your pastor, so therefore you must believe exactly everything that he believes, right? Come on, show us your swastika tattoo!”, I was practically throwing things at the TV. It was the most convoluted, ridiculous line of questioning, clearly intended only to basically prevent Obama with a no-win situation where whatever he said could be seized upon to smear him. In addition, I was absolutely disgusted with the number of times Hillary was interrupted mid-sentence by Russert. What a pig. Then Brian Williams (who I normally can tolerate) literally scolded her for trying to make another point when he wanted to go to a commercial break. Seriously, I haven’t watched a debate in years, and I think I’m done with them. Utterly disgusting.
Obama responds well though–he sticks to the issues, and talks about them in a way that is smart and concise.
Yeah, that was uncool. If I may be so bold as to offer relevant linkage on a non-Self-Promotion-Sunday (which I almost always forget about until it’s no longer Sunday), I have a new post up about the vast extent of media bias against both Clinton and Obama here: The Bias About the Bias
God, I am so sick and tired of hearing people talk about Russert like he’s the greatest, toughest political reporter ever. He’s only tough and tenacious when it comes to questions that have no f^%#ing bearing whatsoever on actual policy or how said policy affects my life as an American. His Farrakhan chew-toy wasn’t quite as bad as his “What’s your favorite Bible verse” question from a while back, but it was damn close.
Yeah, the line of questions both candidates got was insulting. The sad thing is that this was the most watched MSNBC debate, so this kind of behavior from Russert will continue. I’m an Obama supporter, but think Clinton had a great point when she said she was being asked all the questions first. Think she was wrong for telling that lame SNL joke, though.
Russert is a weenie on several levels, most of which has to do with his continuing insistence that he is ‘objective’ when it’s clear that he doesn’t even strive to come close to that standard. That said, I’m not Jewish, and I wouldn’t for a minute conflate Obama’s opinions on Judaism and Israel with Farakkhan’s (which I take it is the force of calling this a smear), but is still concerns me that Obama’s pastor thinks Farakkhan is such a great guy. One chooses a pastor as a spiritual leader, after all, so it doesn’t seem to me that Wright’s view on Farakkhan are somehow completely irrelevant. It’s not that *all* of Wright’s opinions have to match Obama’s, but there are going to be deal-breakers, for me. If Wright had talked about what a great guy George Bush Jr. is, it would give many of us pause, for instance.
If Wright had talked about what a great guy George Bush Jr. is, it would give many of us pause, for instance. Actually, it wouldn’t have given me any pause. I’m so strongly in favor of secularism, I don’t feel a spiritual leader is necessarily a social leader. I grew up in a church whose basic religious principles I still agree with, but whose social and political stances I have completely departed from. The Audacity of Hope sermon, if you’ve read Obama’s summary of it, was a strong and inspiring one. Farrakhan is homophobic, misogynist, anti-Semetic, and a host of other awful things. Obama’s trying to walk a very fine line of denouncing everything about him except his civil rights past, acknowledging repeatedly that he disagrees strongly with everything Farrakhan’s had to say. Obama doesn’t have to accept Wright’s endorsement of third parties to have Wright’s spiritual advice.
what’s especially disgusting is that mccain has just accepted the nomination of one of the vilest creatures of the christian far right, john hagee and no one is taking him to task for it. http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/28/hagee-mccain-endorsement/
I for one am really sick of seeing the following syllogism applied to African American politicians: 1. Black person A has said or done vile or silly things. 2. Candidate B is black. 3. Therefore, B may be assumed to support everything A has said or done unless s/he explicitly states otherwise. At least Russert tried to make a connection, however farfetched, between Obama and Farrakhan other than skin color. Most commentators don’t even bother.