The interview is scary not only for McCain's "wouldn't heart a flea" sugary little voice and supplicant demeanor but he ties in himself in so many verbal knots trying to slide around the question, that even I felt sorry for him. This is the man after all who once called the Revs Falwell and Robertson "agents of intolerance" and I had admired him for that. But this is now a man who is defining flip flop--he has made up to Falwell, speaking at his university and saying mildly, "I will continue to have disagreements with Rev. Falwell, and I hope that there will be areas where we can agree."
This week talking with the press, when he was not trying to be TV sweet with them and could have made up for his Sunday embarrassment, all he could do is repeat the same thing five times “When someone endorses me, that does not mean that I embrace their views,” ... the idea that Hurricane Katrina was punishment for the sins of New Orleans. “It’s nonsense, it’s nonsense, it’s nonsense, it’s nonsense, it’s nonsense.” Just compare that with Obama's masterful speech on race.
Now recall the point in the Cleveland Democratic debate when Clinton looks for some action with Obama on his Farrakhan endorsement by insisting that he "reject the endorsement." the subtle way Obama answers allows us to consider what Clinton is saying.
OBAMA: to (Tim Russert), "I have to say I don't see a difference between denouncing and rejecting. There's no formal offer of help from Minister Farrakhan that would involve me rejecting it. But if the word "reject" Senator Clinton feels is stronger than the word "denounce," then I'm happy to concede the point, and I would reject and denounce."
How does Clinton believe that reject is stronger than denounce? The way we all understand those terms, to reject is to send it back, refuse it; it is what we would do when presented with something objectionable or defective; that certainly is what one might do with an endorsement but how is that stronger than a denouncement? Denounce means to condemn or censure openly or publicly, which one assumes is what Obama as doing in regards to Farrakhan's ideas and utterances, but how is rejection stronger? Angels are dancing on the head of the pin here but I think McCain should be denouncing Hagee, not continuing to accept his endorsement.
Right now I can't say that Clinton has any reverend or pastor endorsement problems but she may have her own reject/denounce problems if she is the nominee. Her opponent in the primary refuses to go there, the media given her a free pass on it, and the Republicans aren't focused on her yet.
Lucky her, she has the endorsement of someone that I admire, The Rev. Calvin O. Butts III of Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, a major liberal voice. But pastors are supposed to afflict the comfortable and speak truth to power, and Rev. Butts has said some things the fundamentalist right would love to exploit. I think this one is especially good.
The Rev. Butts:
"Right in New York City, outside the Museum of National History, there is a statue of Teddy Roosevelt riding a horse with a Native American clinging to his boot on one side and an African-American on the other, "What we should do is rent two tow trucks, loop a steel cable over the statue and pull it down." Next thing we know McCain is going to complain that Clinton advocates tearing Teddy Roosevelt down.
"Right in New York City, outside the Museum of National History, there is a statue of Teddy Roosevelt riding a horse with a Native American clinging to his boot on one side and an African-American on the other, "What we should do is rent two tow trucks, loop a steel cable over the statue and pull it down." Next thing we know McCain is going to complain that Clinton advocates tearing Teddy Roosevelt down.
No comments:
Post a Comment