Politics, News & Issues >
Presidential Elections 2008
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedWas U.S. Rep. John Lewis correct in accusing the McCain campaign of using unduly hostile rhetoric?
Results so far:
| Yes | 47% | 21 votes | Total: 45 votes | |
| No | 53% | 24 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesI think the word in the Helium question should be "spanking" rather than "accusing. What the McCain campaign really needs is a little adult supervision. In this presidential contest, McCain-Palin is willing to risk inciting wingnuts to violence and possible assassination attempts on an opponent just to win. It's an example of the view that, "If I can't win, nobody will."
That's part of the problem with the Republican campaign machine which is clearly using "unduly hostile rhetoric" to win an otherwise unwinnable election. Here's hoping it won't work. After the 2000 and 2004 presidential campaigns and 2006 House and Senate campaigns, the American public has been so inundated with hostile, nasty, irresponsible claims and accusations that we haven't had time to forget how bad political lying has become. We're more aware and conscious and this time it probably won't work.
I don't blame Representative John Lewis for reminding us of this, just in case there are a few whose memories are as short as so many politicians hope for. John Lewis has every right to bring this to our attention. He's recognized by John McCain himself as a "true American hero" for his devotion to non-violent civil rights advocacy during the 1960s when he suffered bloody beating by Alabama State Troupers and also "has the scars to show for it." John Lewis was appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977 to head ACTION, a federal agency of 250,000 volunteers. He was elected to the House in 1986 and has been lauded ever since by his peers and several presidents for his dedication to the preservation of civil rights for all Americans.
Lewis is eminently qualified to judge when political rhetoric becomes hate speech. He lived through it once before and doesn't want to see it happen again.
While the McCain-Palin campaign claims in robocalls in battleground states that Obama pals around with a domestic terrorist, gets contributions from Islamic terrorist organizations, and has voted to murder newborn babies while an Illinois state senator, it's hard to grasp why McCain-Palin whines foul about Lewis' admonition against hate speech.
I understand that McCain is an old man and this is his last chance to be president. I understand he wants to win so badly he's willing to do anything, say anything, lie about anything in order to win. What I can't understand is why this tested warrior is willing to give up his honorable reputation as an honest man. Why did he choose a running mate who's clearly unqualified to be president if he's unable to serve out his first term? Why does he risk fomenting civil unrest and disorder? Why does his campaign suggest that Republicans are anointed by God and everyone else is a treasonous, anti-American baby killer? Why does McCain testily imply in the final debate that his opponent has conspired with ACORN to subvert the election process and destroy the foundations of Democracy? It's what the GOP has been doing since Newt Gingrich first introduced his Contract With America, which brought us Karl Rove's hideously successful campaign playbook, which gave us Bush-Cheney and ultimately the collapse of the American economy.
HL Mencken's prescient quote, "No one ever went broke (or lost an election) by underestimating the intelligence of the American people," has been a Republican strategy for two decades. Today's example is Minnesota Representative Michelle Bachmann's (Republican) call for a "full media investigation" of all congresspersons who don't share her party's views to expose those who are anti-American (MSNBC's Hardball, Oct 17, 2008). Who in the hell are these supposed Republican patriots who invite a return to McCarthyism if not the Ku Klux Klan? They're not representative of the party that I've supported for most of my life.
I'm not the only Republican who sees the McCain-Palin campaign as a disaster. Well known and respected conservatives George Will, David Frum, even William Kristol have denounced this RNC's despicable campaign tactics and distanced themselves from it.
John Lewis is not only justified in his admonition, he's absolutely right.
Learn more about this author, Michael Patrick.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Rep. John Lewis from GA is a highly respected long-term Congressman. Lewis participated in the struggle for civil rights, endured the hardships, and has the scars to show for it.
No one denies his efforts to bring equality to the American landscape; however, his remarks about the McCain campaign sowing seeds of hatred were over the top and invoked the race card where it has no relevance.
Lewis said McCain and Palin were "sowing the seeds of hatred and division" and "hostility in our political discourse," and noted the tone that segregationist Gov. George Wallace fostered in 1960s Alabama." He went on to add remarks about four school children that were burned alive in a church.
Secret Service men dispute that allegation, and found no evidence of a hate rally, and in fact didn't hear the infamous line, "kill him," referring to Bill Ayers. To characterize one or two people as a "hate crowd" is to fuel the very hate rhetoric that Lewis claims he wants to avoid.
Lewis' statement is very strong and once again brings the notion of "racism" into the campaign rhetoric, but where is the race connection? Bill Ayers is white, not black. His friendship with Barack Obama is of interest to the American voter and is one of a group of radical friendships surrounding the Obama mystique.
John Lewis made no credible argument in attempting to tie racism and the subject of former Underground Weatherman, Bill Ayers to a racial theme. It's not there.
A strange thing happens in the Obama campaign each time the name of Bill Ayers is mentioned in the political arena. Team Obama goes into overdrive to prevent the Ayers information from scrutiny.
In August, a local Chicago radio show aired information about Ayers and Obama relationship. Team Obama was invited to participate, but instead spammed the radio station with phone calls and emails on two occasions. In September, AIP ran and ad showing the Bill Ayers connection and team Obama wrote the Department of Justice seeking to discredit the organization.
Team Obama warned a number of television stations to not run the Ayers piece by AIP and a number of them complied with his request including FOX news.
In Missouri, team Obama enlisted the help of lawyers and law enforcement to shut down opposing voices. This is the man the voters will very likely elect to office in November, a man who prefers to use police state tactics to shut down opposition. This is the man who preaches "unity" and change from the old way of politics.
Bill Ayers and Barack Obama have mutual friends and a past business relationship that should make the public curious. Lewis is off course here because the voting public have the right to know about their relationship and the grants they gave to mutual friends while the two sat on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Fund.
One example is Rashid Khalidi whose children the Obamas babysat, and with whom they've shared family dinners. Ayers has spent time around Khalidi's dinner table also. Khalidi's foundation was given almost $200,000 in grants from Obama and Ayers. These grants go to an effort by AAAN to obtain equal rights for illegal immigrants.
Obamas relationships to radicals is understandable because his neighbors include, Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and once included Rashid Khalidi.
The cries of "Kill him." from some of the people in the McCain campaign crowd were directed toward Bill Ayers. Secret Service men dispute the notion that the crowd was unruly or mad with passionate anger as the press portrayed the crowd.
Over the past couple of years Lewis has made several over the top statements, some of which he's apologized for afterward.
Did John Lewis over react, or did he see an opportunity to play the race card where race was not an issue? Lewis issued a follow-up statement Saturday, saying it was not his "intention or desire" to directly compare McCain or Palin to Wallace, but he sowed the seeds.
Learn more about this author, Mona Gallagher.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Presidential Elections 2008
- Should the next president do more to protect jobs from being sent to countries other than the United States?
- Obama or McCain? The choice gets more difficult as election day nears
- US elections: Did Ralph Nader's presidential bid in 2000 cost Al Gore the election?
- Hillary hails Barack: A sincere endorsement?
- Which party is better suited for the White House in '09: Democrat or Republican?
- Is McCain provoking racism at his political rallies?
