http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/08/links_6.html

From New York Magazine: Obama: ‘It’s Like These Guys Take Pride in Being Ignorant.’

I think one of the reasons the racist/sexist camps have gotten their panties in a bunch is that people have been equating "making a racist comment" with "being a racist". Same thing with sexism. That "panties in a bunch" line is surely a bit sexist, or at least could be interpreted that way, but does that brand me "a sexist"? When we talk about race and gender, sometimes we cross the line. Sometimes the line moves. Sometimes the line is in different places for different people. We need to stop branding people as "a racist" or "a sexist" when they make a comment is IS racist or sexist.

It is entirely possible that Bill Clinton made a slightly racist comment or two over the course of the primary. Does that make him a racist? No.

Have I said a sexist thing in my life? Yes. Is it really worth it to brand me a sexist?

What's holding Obama back, in my opinion, is the reluctance of HRC supporters to embrace him. I think it is having a profound effect in the media b/c these voters are unwilling to forgive any realpolitik compromises Obama must make in order to be elected. I believe HRC supporters are particularly vulnerable to the very charges, ads, and media attention that are framed by John McCain--the elitism, the race baiting, the lack of experience, the empty suit--all rhetoric begun during the primary season. It doesn't even make sense that voters who bought into those storylines earlier would simply give up their perspective b/c somebody told them they now have a different candidate.

I am honestly not criticizing here, just pointing out what I see as truth. There is an audience wider than Republicans for the negative Obama memes, and the press always looks for larger audiences. While McCain faced the same problem early on, he has had time to bring most Repubs into the fold.

So, glyn46, when you say "Don't shoot the messenger," I get it, but you have to realize that Joan is perhaps part of the very reason Obama is not doing well (one among millions, not singling Joan out but explaining why it is relevant for readers to suggest she not belabor these themes like any old media might. She has a progressive mission, after all, with a progressive audience).

And I'd Rather Not Say, you're right that Obama should be crushing JM, but I'm afraid that the lack of an enthusiastic and unified Democratic crowd behind BO, half of whom respond with anger and delight at his obstacles and missteps, is a large part of the problem. It's the same old story, one described eloquently by Sans Prejudice: Dems don't really unify well. Although SP made us sound eccentric and independent and awfully cute, it is in fact why we don't win elections.

Christ. It just really never stops, does it?

I didn't even have to look at your link...I was there! And yes, it was great.

But this is what I meant to say to you in my last post: He does this all the time! He responds to ads almost immediately and really well! That very day when I was at his town hall meeting, I heard on the radio that JM had put out a new ad, and by the time I got home--a 20-minute car ride--Obama had put out a response ad! I mean, I had just left the guy! And it was really direct and pointed and strong. (Of course I can't for the life of me remember what it was about right now).

But I think many people just don't see this stuff if they are former HRC supporters b/c they are really finding the JM talking points really resonant. And the media picks up on that rather than BO's swift and strong responses b/c there's this larger audience for it--both the Repubs and the HRC diehards.

Anyway, I think you wanted HRC right? If yes, then I am encouraged that you are looking to move on, disappointed but pragmatic. I appreciate it.

John McCain's "maverick" ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylJkmMR8Fek

Obama's very swift response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHN9bLCgF7k

Yes, with that link you have shown that indeed the fire is starting to come out. Couple points:

You have to dig to find this stuff as it is a vested interest of the Mainstream Corporate Media to keep this race as close as possible. It generates more ad revenue. Statements (and general fiestiness) like the one made in the link you provided won't be as easily buried at the Convention or in the three debates.

Also if you took a Venn diagram of those people who still think Bush is a fantastic president plus those who think Obama is a Muslim, you probably will get around 40%. Sorry, but there are a lot of stupid people out there.

Plus the summer burnout, after an overlong and contentious primary, and a lack of focus on politics in general amongst regular people who have kind of tuned out for the summer. It will rev up again. Usually I despise politicians that 'keep their powder dry' but in this one instance I actually think its a good idea to not go full bore guns blazing mode until the end of August at the convention. People tune in again after Labor Day. This is why I'm glad McCain is doing his kitchen sink all negative all the time stuff now. It won't be sustainable for him and it's already starting to backlash.

I think we are in good shape. I'm guardedly optomistic.

I'm shaking my head at this essay and how it seems to be all about what was DONE to Bill. Like he played no role in inviting it on himself. Read Marjorie Williams' "The Woman in the Washington Zoo" and look at how Bill behaved during Al Gore's campaign -- it's all about him. And so too in this essay, the focus is on what others did to Bill instead of the way that he shocked us with his callous and dismissive remarks about the South Carolina primary and the "fairy tale" that is Obama's landmark candidacy.

Maybe this is part of why some Dems still talk about voting for McCain -- like Joan and like Bill and like McCain, they can relate more easily to the fear of being called racist than to what it would be like to live in a world moving beyond those battles.