I agree it is a tactic of desperation in an attempt to connect to people's most base projections and prejudices. Watching the clip below, I was just as disturbed by the crowd's mentality and manner. It reminded me of the crowd chanting " USA, USA.." at the RNC. The chanting didn't come across as a show of unity or pride but rather as a menacing, foreboding foreshadow. Much like how the American public reacts to seeing large crowds of xenophobes in a middle east setting that we might see on the news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6H3Xuk1T2w

The McCain campaign should offer up an apology. Maybe he will suspend his campaign again? If only...

Kevin, get your facts straight. Palin criticized Obama for "palling around" with Bill Ayers, who is white. Nowhere have I seen her accusing Obama of consorting with "black terrorists" as you allege.

Jack, are you arguing that there has been no concerted, organized effort to portray Obama as untrustworthy because " he is not like one of us..." ?

Character is much easier kept than recovered. ~Thomas Paine

My very conservative aunt who is a transplant from Chicago to the Dallas area just emailed me moments ago to inform that there is no way in Hades that she will cast a vote for McCain now due to Sarah Palin's outrageous statement from yesterday. If the McCain camp has completely lost people like my aunt, they are done. The AP may be right, This may come back to haunt the McCain Camp.

She won't be able to pin this on Katie Couric annoying her or a mean voter asking her a question. It was just her, talking to the American people, with a crowd that showed its true stripes. I think it will sicken many and force some other people, like my aunt, to do a gut check. I always knew my aunt had class.

Actually, Jack, she alleged "terroristS," as in the plural form of the word. So, your statement of the "facts" is itself factually challenged.

The Weathermen were an overtly white group. But their stated premise was to be a catalyst within the white community with the goal of joining up with like-minded overtly black groups for what they believed was the imminent world-wide revolution.

Of course, as Tucker Eskew's newest student, we wouldn't expect Sarah Palin to overtly place the race card. That's something that Eskew apparently prefers to obliquely infer, knowing that his audience will grasp the inference without him having to spell it out for them.

Nevertheless, in the interest of factual correctness I have deleted the word "black."

Kevin, get your facts straight. Palin criticized Obama for "palling around" with Bill Ayers, who is white. Nowhere have I seen her accusing Obama of consorting with "black terrorists" as you allege.

I don't see where Kevin alleges a "black terrorist" phrase used by Palin or anyone else. I do see where Kevin refers to "palling around with terrorists", which incidentally appears to be what Palin is saying about Obama.

From the Associated Press:

By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is "palling around with terrorists" and doesn't see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign.

And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.

First, Palin's attack shows that her energetic debate with rival Joe Biden may be just the beginning, not the end, of a sharpened role in the battle to win the presidency.

"Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country," Palin told a group of donors in Englewood, Colo. A deliberate attempt to smear Obama, McCain's ticket-mate echoed the line at three separate events Saturday.

Which person would care to defend Palin's remarks? You, Jack Roberts? Or what about you, Jack Webb?

I'm not defending Palin's remarks. I'm defending BlueOeregon's commitment not to let Kevin make shit up.

I'm still missing where Kevin is "making shit up". The AP analysis piece I posted in comments in this thread definitely says that Palin's words have specific racial subtext. So the connection Kevin made is absolutely correct.

Carla, Kevin has already changed the erroneous statement, but he neglected to put a black line through the word he deleted, so you can't see where the original mistake was made. A bit of deception.

If that's the case, I agree Kevin should score out whatever was incorrect and make the correction. But the overarching point he's making in the post, even with the erroneous word, is fundamentally correct.

Carla, citing Douglass Daniel's opinion piece for the Associated Press does not prove Palin's comments had a "racially tinged subtext" as he claims. It simply proves that some people are still determined to attribute every criticism of Barack Obama as racially motivated.

One of the things I like about Obama is that he is very careful not to play the race card. He understands that his candidacy transcends race and that the last thing he wants is to be forced back into the racial "box" by opponents or misguided supporters.

I personally don't think trying to tie him to Ayers or Wright is ultimately effective because Obama himself comes across as anything but radical or impulsive. By recharacterizing Palin's attack as racial rather than anachronistric, Douglass Daniel risks making a lame effort more effective.

But then what do you expect from a guy whose claim to fame is writing the definitive biography of that scion of journalism, Lou Grant.

Jack:

So you're saying that Palin's accusations about Obama and Ayers are factually correct-- therefore the analysis by the AP/Daniel is just an oversensitivity to criticism of Obama?

Interesting tack--if not bizarre.

I don't see how race can be avoided in this case, given Ayers' previous activities. Race is an issue in the U.S. Palin and her handlers are cynically attempting to exploit it.

Daniels makes a reasonable and informed analysis of Palin's statement. If you have evidence to add that Daniels is incorrect, please share it. Just saying "he's wrong" doesn't do much to add to the discussion.

I don't see how race can be avoided entirely given Tucker Eskew's previous activities and his "senior" role with the Palin/McCain campaign.

The guy is an unapologetic sleezebag and McCain hired him.

So you're saying that Palin's accusations about Obama and Ayers are factually correct-- therefore the analysis by the AP/Daniel is just an oversensitivity to criticism of Obama?

No, I'm not saying that at all, Carla. I think the allegation that Obama is "palling around with terrorists" is ridiculous. But tying Obama to Bill Ayers smacks more of modern day McCarthyism, not racism.

I don't see how race can be avoided in this case, given Ayers' previous activities. Race is an issue in the U.S. Palin and her handlers are cynically attempting to exploit it.

Sorry, I don't get this. Bill Ayers was a white, anti-war terrorist. I don't see what this has to do with race. In fact, I don't know anyone who has ever suggested that there are "black terrorists" and that makes the argument that Palin's statement about terrorists must be implying black terrorists a bit bizarre.

Daniels makes a reasonable and informed analysis of Palin's statement. If you have evidence to add that Daniels is incorrect, please share it. Just saying "he's wrong" doesn't do much to add to the discussion.

He didn't ofer a "reasonable and informed analysis of Palin's statement." He offers no evidence and frankly does not even make an intelligent argument why we should interpret her statement as racial. He makes a bald, unsubstantiated assertion.

I think you guys are so obsessed with your stereotypes of conservatives that you miss some of your best arguments by simply getting caught up in your own knee-jerk reactions.

I don't see how race can be avoided entirely given Tucker Eskew's previous activities and his "senior" role with the Palin/McCain campaign.

Kevin, the guilt by association argument you are trying to make against Palin is every bit as ridiculous as the one she is trying to make against Obama.

I don't know Tucker Eskew, but even if he played the race card against McCain in 1980, it doesn't mean he's playing that card now. It's more accurate to say they are playing the "disloyal to America" card; that is, a different kind of sleeze.

After all, they don't need accuse Obama of being black. I think everyone pretty much knows that by now. And I think he's already demonstrated that won't stop people from voting for him.

Sorry, I obviously meant "played the race card against McCain in 2000," and not "1980" above.

Sorry, I don't get this. Bill Ayers was a white, anti-war terrorist. I don't see what this has to do with race. In fact, I don't know anyone who has ever suggested that there are "black terrorists" and that makes the argument that Palin's statement about terrorists must be implying black terrorists a bit bizarre.

I think Daniels has it about right, Jack. Here's what he said:

Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?

In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers' day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.

Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as "not like us" is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.

In a bubble, you might think Daniels is just cage-rattling. But when you look at it in the context of a recent column by Bobby May, a GOP County Party Treasurer in Virginia, its pretty striking. May wrote what he described as a satirical platform for Obama, which included painting the White House black and hiring rapper Ludacris.

Another piece of the perspective, the lynching in effigy of Obama at George Fox.

Race is in play here, Jack. And Palin is trying to work it, whether you wish to see it (or admit it) or not.

I don't know Tucker Eskew, but even if he played the race card against McCain in 1980, it doesn't mean he's playing that card now.

Oh please, Jack. You are a known political quantity. You haven't been living under a rock for the last decade and we all know it.

The attempt to portray yourself as not knowing who Tucker Eskew is or what he does (although you neatly avoided exactly saying that, now didn't you? Plausible deniability works better around the non-politically aware!) is laughably absurd on it's face.

Carla, Daniels argument comes perilously close to saying that any criticism of Obama before a predominantly white audience is racism.

If tying him to terrorists is racist, then I assume tying him to liberalism must be racism, tying him to higher taxes and more government spending must be racist, tying him to wanting to pull out of Iraq must be racist, and tying him to supporting labor unions must be racist.

In fact, since some people are making racists attacks on Obama, then anyone who criticizes Obama are therefore ineviably associated with them and must also be racist.

So THAT explains why Bill and Hillary Clinton were considered racists during the primary! I was sort of confused by that at the time, but now its all clear.

The best thing that could happen to John McCain is for voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania to be told that it is racist to criticize Barack Obama.

Carla, Daniels argument comes perilously close to saying that any criticism of Obama before a predominantly white audience is racism.

No, Jack. Daniels argument is that when they toss around the "terrorist" label and try to associate Obama with a radical fringe guy and his group--there's a mindset they're trying to tap into. That mindset is overtly racist--and there's ample evidence to demonstrate that it exists.

"Terrorism" in this country wears a very racial mask. Its completely different than using the word "liberal" or the other labels/phrased you cited. This isn't just criticism of Obama..and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop insulting my intelligence by that inference.

To follow up on Carla's excellent comment viz race/terrorism...

White conservative terrorist like McVeigh have typically been referred to as being members of a militia or simply militants. Pro-Lifer terrorists have typically been referred to as extremists.

It's typically only those of different skin color and/or those on the Left that get referred to as "terrorists."

Jacks and Jonnie,

Kevin's specific verbiage aside, you bet your ass that racism is a tool in the Republican box. To deny that is delusional. Here are a couple of examples from the past couple of weeks.

In northern Virgina, Obama lawn sing hosts are receiving this gem:

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but a friend has recommended that I reach out to you about a problem that you may be having but may not be aware of: Have you ever considered whether your ostentatious support for Senator Barack Obama is really a disguise that hides a deeply anchored form of racism towards Black-Americans?

Racism comes in many forms, and there is a significant possibility that your sponsorship of Senator Obama is really an obsessive compulsion to prove to yourself, and to others, that you are not a racist. Have you looked within yourself and examined your motives?

Sure, we can turn it all into a joke, like some have: an Obama lawn-sign is the yuppy status-symbol du jour; a hip and shiny accessory, this season’s iPhone. “But dear, every Volvo in the Whole Foods parking lot has an Obama sticker on it!”—that’s yet another parody of White property-owning affluence as described by stuffwhitepeoplelike.com

Have you really considered why you are so fixated by Senator Obama? How important was the pigmentation of Obama’s skin in spurring your interest? Do you really believe that he, or anyone else for that matter, is more qualified to run for the presidency than Senator Hillary Clinton? C’mon, let’s be honest with ourselves; that’s the first step in the healing process. and it goes on from there......

In predominately black neighborhoods in Philly, they are circulating false intimidation fliers alleging that police will be out in force to arrest people with unpaid traffic and parking tickets to suppress black voter turnout.

Racial politics combined with effort to bring forward any source to discredit Obama as a radical, including Jonnie's laugh out loud characterization of the University of Chicago (home of Leo Strauss and the neo-conservative movement as well as Milton Friedman's simplistic Right wing financial theories) as a hotbed of liberalism; Attempts to paint Obama as a contemporary "friend" of people long dead or mature during Obama's childhood pretty much outlines the whole attack going forward.

It is in fact based on a tissue of lies, and any objective observer would so conclude.

I'm neither black nor low-info enough to be swayed by these ridiculousnesses, but something just tells me that the VAST majority of African Americans intending to vote next month won't be stopped by any flier, phone call or threat trying to stop them. They might have sat at home when it was an effete Massachusetts windsurfer running...not this time.

"I'm defending BlueOeregon's commitment not to let Kevin make shit up. "

Good luck with all that. He was brought on board to be a hatchet man for Merkley, and was allowed to violate posting rules repeatedly, without sanction or even apparent threat of sanction. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for BlueO to rein Kevin in.

Gotta agree with Jack Roberts mostly on this one. This attack is McCarthyism mixed with anachronism. However, I think the anachronism points to reinforcing anti-Muslim smears, which Jack doesn't mention, rather than anti-black racism.

Anti-abortion terrorists often are referred to as terrorists in opinion media. "Domestic terrorism" laws have primarily been used to prosecute white arsonists associated with the Earth Liberation Front or animal rights organizations. If people understand Palin's comments in terms of Bill Ayers, they will think white.

The McCarthyism comes with "palling around." It's a plain, simple, deliberate mischaracterization of the relationship, i.e. a lying smear.

IMO the implication of the anachronism is less racial than an extension of the anti-Muslim anti-Obama smears. Unlike say in the U.K. where terrorists can be both Muslim and "home-grown," perhaps because of the I.R.A. experience (and U.D.F. within Northern Ireland), American Muslims prosecuted for terrorism tend to get exoticized and associated with countries of ancestral origin even if born in the U.S. So if people don't recognize the reference to Ayers, his wife Bernardine Dohrn and the Weather Underground, they will most likely think Muslim, which I would argue is the most common association of "terrorist" in U.S. mass culture today.

"Muslim" in turn may invoke some of the rising racisms which, while not exactly new, especially in the West & Southwest vis a vis American Indians, Latinos & Asian-Americans or Asian immigrants, are eroding the older dominance of black-white polar frameworks about race (along with moves to claim/recognize multiple racial identities, whose progress and limits Barack Obama embodies in interesting ways). The dominance of black vs. white polar framings derived from older Eastern dominance in terms of population, wealth, and location of cultural and media institutionas and organizations, and the influence on them of conflicts over slavery, Civil War & Reconstruction Jim Crow, and the Civil Rights movement.

The central underlying trope in this smear is "unAmerican," IMO, in both a McCarthyist and anti-Muslim sense.

<hr/>