Cup of Cha
This is China

John McCain could still easily be the next American president. Although behind in the polls, it’s pretty easy to come up with a mathematical formula for him to win the 270 electoral votes he would need. Yet the man who says he would “rather lose an election than lose a war” should be worrying about the seeds of hatred that his campaign is sowing. If he is not careful, history will forget his significant accomplishments and only remember him for his poor judgment at the end of his career.

From Governor Palin, we should expect no more than the cynical attacks on Senator Obama that equate him with a terrorist. After all, this is the same person who responds to questions about what newspapers she reads by saying “whatever is in front of me,” and clarifies by saying that she reads “all of them.” If you can’t name a national newspaper, probably you don’t see what’s wrong with riling up crowds to call your opponent a “terrorist.”

But John McCain is different. As wrong as he is on so many issues, and as much as he has switched his stands on everything from immigration and torture to the Bush tax cuts over the last eight years, he is genuinely a good man with a sense of right. And he must know that what is going on in his campaign is wrong.

Congressman John Lewis, a civil rights veteran and a man Senator McCain cited as one of his heroes earlier this year, has come out and compared the current campaign to that of segregationist George Wallace in the 1960s. he said:

sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse

John McCain is no George Wallace, but if he’s not careful, history may forget this distinction. And that is tragic. McCain spent the first 66 years of his life standing up for honor and dignity in the face of opposition and small-mindedness. Now, in the midst of a financial crisis and two wars, he has equated his opponent with a 1960s radical because they sat on boards together.

McCain argues that he is merely questioning Obama’s judgment and honesty. This would be fair enough, even though there is strong evidence that contradicts McCain’s assertions about the Ayers connection. (The non-partisan FactCheck.org said this about the rhetoric: “McCain says in an Internet ad that the two “ran a radical ‘education’ foundation” in Chicago. But the supposedly “radical” group was supported by a Republican governor and included on its board prominent local civic leaders, including one former Nixon administration official who has given $1,500 to McCain’s campaign this year.”)

The point, however, is no so much the validity, or lack thereof, of any of the specific claims that McCain makes. More critically, McCain needs to understand that his strategists are telling him to go after the connection because it stirs up a vague sense of anger and hatred. The campaign argues that this isn’t about Obama being a terrorist or some sort of “other,” but rather it’a question of honesty and candor. Surely no one would mistake dishonesty and poor judgment for having personal terrorist links.

Except that many people are missing that point. Those looking for a reason to hate Obama are seizing on this alleged attack on the honesty and judgment of the senator and making the connection that Obama himself is part of some part of a vague terrorist network.

One might be inclined to dismiss the jump from being less-than-candid, to being a participant in a terrorist network, as something that only a nasty crowd in Minnesota could make. Just because people yelled out “terrorist” and a woman called him “an Arab” (as if that would have made him a terrorist), it doesn’t mean that the campaign is asking voters to think that Obama is a terrorist. And it doesn’t mean that many people out there are confusing poor judgment in associating with Ayers with Obama actually being friends with terrorists. Right?

But what McCain is starting to realize, and what his managers have long known, is that people hear the rhetoric of the campaign and take that as a cue to equate Obama, with all of his “otherness,” to a terrorist sympathizer. Don’t believe me? Just listen to his own running mate:

Our opponent though, is someone who sees America it seems as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country?

Read that again. Obama is not untrustworthy because he made poor decisions. He is someone who is friends with terrorists because he sees America as imperfect. She is saying that the Ayers association was a conscious decision made because of his connection to the 1960s radical left. If Sarah Palin doesn’t understand the distinction in argument then why is John McCain so surprised that so many other people can’t either?

John McCain has long been an honorable man, but he is now in an untenable situation. If he continues down the current path of ignoring the country’s problems and focusing on hate-inspiring attacks, he may be able to convince enough people to vote for him to become the next president. Yet it seems that a man of such character would rather lose an election than lose his honor and legacy by sowing the seeds of hatred.

Share This

Tags: ayers, lewis, mccain, obama, palin
Follow Comments via RSS Feed
You can leave a response or trackback from your site.