How low will Obama-supporters and their allies in the MSM go to charge John McCain and Sarah Palin with racism?

It seems now that any criticism Republicans level against Obama is racist.  I guess if you look for something hard enough, you’ll find it anywhere.  Lewis Diuguid, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist, contends that in calling Obama policies “socialist,” “McCain and Palin have simply reached back in history to use an old code word for black.”

WOW!  I just have to shake my head at the absurdity of this guy’s notion.  Or, perhaps, as one smart college blogger put it, “I should have known it was a racist epitaph since McCain was saying it.”

Do these people know how much they’re soiling the political discourse by so labeling any criticism conservatives offer?  Instead of attempting to rebut McCain’s charge, they insult him.   They just want to believe that all Republicans are racist hate-mongers, even if they have to twist the record and invent new definitions of words to do so.

Maybe it’s because Diuguid, like Obama, is an devotee of Saul Alinsky who was not interested in debate, but in gaining power by whatever means necessary:   “A People’s Organization is dedicated to an eternal war…A war is not an intellectual debate, and in the war against social evils there are no rules of fair play.”

And they accuse McCain of “running one of the most appalling campaigns we can remember.” Guess that’s because the MSM haven’t been monitoring themselves this time around. Or other mean-spirited Obama supporters.

Remember how the New York Times went into high dudgeon in May when then-presumptive Republican nominee John McCain had not released his medical records in a timely enough fashion to please their editorial board?  “No presidential candidate,” the old gray lady inveighed, “should get to the point that he has locked up his party’s nomination without public vetting of his health.”

Even though McCain did release 1,200 pages of those records, that wasn’t enough for the Times editors who wanted to be able to photocopy them, presumably so they could scan them and post them on the web. (Though they claim they just wanted to “ask other experts what the medical findings might imply.”)

Now, Obama’s “campaign has released only a single page of information about his health history” (via the Jewish Athena). In an editorial yesterday, the Times observes: “Senator Barack Obama has put out such meager information that voters have to take it largely on his campaign’s say-so that he is in good health.” What is striking about this editorial is that while McCain has been far more forthcoming with his medical records than Obama, the editors dwell less on the Democrat’s withholding information than on the need to have “nominees . . . disclose all of their relevant health records.”

The Times goes into high dudgeon when a Republican doesn’t release his records when they want them, but faults both candidates when the Democrat puts out meager information.

If you don’t believe me that if we held Joe Biden to the Sarah Palin standard, the media would make mincemeat of the Delaware Democrat, then take a listen to former CBS News Anchor Dan Rather (at about 1:54 below):

(Via HotAir.)

Had Sarah Palin said that John McCain’s election would generate an international crisis to test the Republicans mettle as Joe Biden said about Obama, Rather believes “it would be above the fold in most newspapers today . . . the newspapers would have jumped all over this and so would the major television outlets.”

While newspapers and TV ignore this, Rather did offer us some hope that people may yet learn of Biden’s wariness about his running mate’s readiness. He suggested that internet would pick up the story and that could be “more important.” (Recall this wasn’t the first time Biden raised the issue of Obama’s readiness. During the campaign for the Democratic nomination, the Delaware Democrat said his Illinois colleague was not ready for the White House.)

With Rather’s coments, we have a lion of the old media acknowledging just how “in the tank” the MSM are for the Democrats.

Had the media offered him the same scrutiny they offer Sarah Palin, well, we’d be questioning his fitness to serve as much as they do hers.  Not just that, we’d be wondering what he truly thinks about his running mate’s readiness to lead. (more…)

UPDATE: Foley responds on Drudge…

FOLEY: 'An online article posted today on Variety's website innaccurately reported that I was supporting Barack Obama. The story on Variety's website, based on a second or third-hand account of my private conversation, is incorrect. I have already voted by absentee ballot in Florida. Although I didn't vote for Senator Obama, I intend to keep my choice private.'

I know there is a joke in here somewhere.   I’m just too busy to think of it.   But our traffic usually spikes when there is a Mark Foley Update, so here goes…. (h/t – Drudge)

I got an excited phone call yesterday from two friends, TV producer Richard Ayoub and talent manager Dolores Cantu, who were having lunch at the Beverly Hills Hotel. Sitting the next table over was Foley, who resigned just before the midterms after the revelation that he sent inappropriate e-mail messages to a congressional page.

Ayounb and Cantu didn’t know immediately recognize him until he told them he had once been in Congress. The jist of the conversation then went like this, according to both:

Cantu: “You didn’t have an affair, did you?”

Foley: “Well, I was…”

Realizing who was in their midst, Ayoub, who has a penchant for devilish humor, offered a deadpanned admonishment, “You should not flirt with congressional pages.” Foley went on to say that nothing happened, he didn’t realize that the page was only 18, and that he perhaps was a bit tipsy when he sent the e-mails.

What they both said was how great Foley looked, and he was particularly excited about Colin Powell’s endorsement that morning of Obama. Foley said he also favors Obama.

And Foley also expressed some pleasure in watching the latest developments from his old Florida district: His successor, Democrat Tim Mahoney, is now in trouble for a series of extramarital affairs.

Foley seems to be the latest sufferer of the “Post-Conservative Gay Liberal Conversion Syndrome” (see: David Catania, Patrick Guerriero, Neil Guiliano, Andrew Sullivan)   That’s the best I could do to coin a new disease name; sorry for its lameness.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Like nearly every Palin-supporting conservative, at least those with access to the web, I believe it was a huge mistake for the McCain campaign to shelter the Alaska Governor from the press for the first month of the fall campaign.  I also think they should have had her do interviews with local TV and talk radio before letting the national network anchors have at her.

According to Fred Barnes, even she thinks she should have handled the press differently in the weeks immediately following the Republican Convention.

Well, now things have changed.  According to CBS News’ Scott Conroy, “the candidate who has been criticized for having a bunker mentality when it came to the national media can now lay legitimate claim to being more accessible than either Joe Biden or Barack Obama.”

I wonder if the media will now start criticizing Biden and Obama for hiding from them.

While Palin has increasingly made herself available to the press in recent days, “Biden hasn’t held a press conference in more than a month, and Obama hasn’t taken questions from his full traveling press corps since the end of September.”

Now, she does “three or four talk radio shows a day, plus interviews on local TV and cable news, appearances on some national shows such as Saturday Night Live, and chats with local print reporters and a few national political writers.”  Not to mention the press conferences and press “availabilities.”

Her opponents love to dwell on her poor performance with Katie Couric, yet she now seems a different person with the traveling press corps than she once did with the CBS News anchor, demonstrating a “breadth of knowledge” which “far exceeds” that which she once offered.

During one recent session, “Palin answered no less than 14 questions from the media.”  That’s six more than Barack Obama took in Texas last March before saying that he’d had enough.  Oh, and she wanted to keep going.

While I share the concern of one reader that Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin may “not display the broad base policy knowledge one should have for the office of the Vice-Presidency,” she has displayed one thing on the campaign trail that even Barack Obama has not, a presidential temperament in the face of relentless criticism.

Like Ronald Reagan, she doesn’t let such obloquy get under her skin. When Sean Hannity asked her in September about the harsh attacks directed against her in the course of this campaign, she replied that she doesn’t let it get to her:

You know, though, the shots that I’m taking, I know what the truth is and I know what my convictions are and my foundation is. So I’m fine there. I’m fine there.

The shots that perhaps our campaign has taken, it’s nothing compared to the shots that some people across America are taking today. The things that really matter: Somebody worried about losing their house because of Wall Street collapses. Somebody worried about losing their job or being able to pay for their child’s health care coverage or a parent perhaps having lost a son or daughter in battle, those are the shots that matter.

I’m going to keep it all in perspective.

Contrast that with Barack Obama’s reaction to criticism and tough questions. He lost his cool after having to answer eight questions back in March. During the summer, he whined about Republican criticisms which had yet to happen and would never take place. Last month, his campaign threatened legal against the National Rifle Association (NRA) for running ads exposing his record on guns.

The Republican vice presidential nominee accepts criticism with equanimity. The Democratic presidential nominee complains about it and attempts to silence it through legal action.

Given that all leaders experience a lot of flak for their actions, shouldn’t we want an executive who accepts criticism as par for the course rather than one who whines about its unfairness? Which one has more confidence in his ability to lead?

UPDATE: Mary Katharine Ham has more on Barack Obama’s unpresidential problem with criticism. Click on more to read an excerpt (more…)