Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Facts? Who needs facts?

By
August 19, 2008

Character assassination has replaced dirty tricks in presidential politics. It’s an ugly and repugnant business that poisons our political dialogue and harms our democracy. Sometimes, it’s a bestseller.

First come the Internet blogs spreading lies and smears, followed by trash-and-destroy books by fringe ideologues repackaging the cyber garbage and adding some of their own. Then, closer to the election, the swift boats move in to finish the job. In 2004, they helped sink John Kerry’s presidential bid; in 2008, they could threaten Barack Obama’s historic march to the White House.

Less than two weeks before Obama is set to accept the Democratic nomination for president, conservative author Jerome R. Corsi’s attack book, "The Obama Nation" (abomination, get it?), debuted this week as No. 1 on The New York Times bestseller list, largely on the strength of bulk purchases by conservative book clubs. The real abomination is the book itself.

Corsi, by the way, co-authored "Unfit for Command," in which swift boat veterans who served with Kerry trashed his Vietnam War record. Kerry waited too long to fight back, and by the time most of the allegations were discredited by news organizations, the damage already had been done.

If anything, Corsi’s smear of Obama is more scurrilous than his attack on Kerry’s honorable military record. He is not just sliming Obama; he is promoting a sick and offensive narrative that tries to turn Obama’s biography and race against him. He accuses Obama of having developed some "anti-American” sentiments and portrays him as a "leftist” who has misrepresented his "extensive connections to Islam" (Obama is a practicing Christian).

The low point of the book may be Corsi’s ugly swipe at Obama’s late mother, a white woman from Kansas who first married a man from Kenya and later an Indonesian. He writes that she chose "men of color” from the "Third World” to be her "mates,” and he suggests that Obama identifies more with his "African blood” than his American roots.

When there are no facts to support his wild allegations, Corsi falls back on accusatory questions. For example, Corsi asks when Obama really stopped using illegal drugs. In his autobiography, Obama admitted experimenting with drugs in his youth until around age 20.

Corsi asks: "Did Obama ever use drugs in his days as a community organizer in Chicago, or when he was a state senator from Illinois? How about in the U.S. Senate?” He also writes that "Obama has yet to answer questions about whether he ever dealt drugs.”

Why am I even repeating this garbage? It’s one way to alert voters. A vote for president should not be based on lies, inaccuracies and smears. Attack books come from both left and right, but few are as vile as Corsi’s, one of several anti-Obama books published this summer.

Corsi told The New York Times his candidate for president is not John McCain but Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party nominee. At least he admits the obvious — that the purpose of his book is "to keep Obama from getting elected.” In reading press accounts of Corsi’s book, I wondered why some of his attack lines seemed vaguely familiar. Then it came to me — early in the Democratic primary campaign some of Hillary Clinton’s aides and surrogates came close to portraying Obama as an exotic figure, not thoroughly American in his roots, whose admitted drug use as a youth had not been fully vetted.

According to Clinton campaign e-mails obtained by Joshua Green of the Atlantic magazine, we also know that Mark Penn, Clinton’s chief strategist, at least toyed with the idea of questioning Obama’s background and values, which he called "a very strong weakness” in Obama.

Penn explained: "His roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values.” Recognizing the delicacy of pursuing such a strategy, Penn suggested: "Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values. Make this a new American Century, the American Strategic Energy Fund. Let’s use our logo to make some flags we can give out. Let’s add flag symbols to the backgrounds.”

Penn suggested that Clinton also remind voters that she was "born in the middle of America” and talk about "the deeply American values you grew up with.” Even though Penn’s idea was roundly rejected by the rest of the Clinton high command, the fact that he even broached the subject within the campaign should be unsettling to the Obama camp.

Imagine if Corsi had gotten his hands on Penn’s memos.

 

(Philip Gailey is editor of editorials for the St. Petersburg Times. E-mail gailey(at)sptimes.com)

6 Responses to Facts? Who needs facts?

  1. Hoosier_CowBoy

    August 19, 2008 at 5:11 pm

    It may be dawning on a major part of the population that whatever is said in this campaign must be ignored, no matter who said it.

    This election will be a test of the MSMs ability to shape public opinion, from what I’m seeing, its going to fail miserably.

    I live in a rural area, covered only by broadcast television. The first observation: there are so many commercials that broadcast MSM has become irrelevant. It simply cannot be watched because the saturation of commercialism has overwhelmed every minute.

    Take the test, turn on broadcast television at random and observe how often it devotes time to non commercial messages. In other words, turn it on, if there’s a commercial, turn it off.

    Repeat…repeat…repeat

    Please do not have a firearm nearby, you will be longing to use it. For myself the remote has become the symbolic substitute for the six shooter, turning off the bad guys the way Chauncey Gardener did in Being There

    A waste of time and energy more profitably employed elsewhere.

    Click! Bang!
    Bang! Click!

  2. Kibitzer

    August 19, 2008 at 7:28 pm

    Corsi asks a question that is going to blow up in BO’s face if he and/or his camp don’t address it, and fast, given all the websites & bloggers out there who can bypass the MSM. And that’s to do with his statement about BO’s drug use (bringing up the subject in timely, attack-dog fashion). There are 2 videos on the net (the 1st dismissable but the 2nd, of a press conference in the Nat’l Press Conf. bldg, not so easily ignored, where a bloke comes across in an impressive way, giving names & phone nos. etc) from a guy who swears that he had a homosexual interaction including drugs with BO when the latter was in the Illinois legislature. It would appear that the BO camp honchos are hoping that this story won’t grow any legs. Especially with the Rovian influence going on in McCain’s camp? That’s a huge gamble. And if it starts dripping into the public’s awareness after BO is established as the Demo party candidate, so that the Dems can’t switch to Hillary at their convention – ? Or if her camp initiates a leak…?
    This isn’t going to go away. He either needs to face it down and deny it convincingly, or own up to it in the same manner he dealt with the toxic-pastor issue, or have it swift-boat him all the way to November. The Repubs aren’t going to let him off the hook on this one, that’s for sure.
    This could yet get even more down and dirty than Gailey has alluded to…

  3. churlpat

    August 19, 2008 at 11:39 pm

    Mr. Kibitzer:

    It is unclear from your post that the homosexual encounter allegation is in Corsi’s book. If it is not in his book, how could Corsi possibly have not known about it and refrained from using it? Why would Corsi not have put such a smoking gun on the front cover of the book?

    And please, if you would, provide a citation to that press conference at the National Press Conf. By which I guess you might mean National Press Club.

    Churlpat — a plutarch by any name is still a plutarch

  4. almandine

    August 19, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    I’m more interested in how BO would respond to the following question: “Senator, you have often said in response to questions about the second amendment that you have no intention of taking hunters’ guns away… what is your complete position on the right to keep and bear handguns?”

  5. adb8917

    August 20, 2008 at 10:10 am

    That Simon and Schuster went along with the publication of Corsi’s book is another shot at the credibility of this country’s major publishing houses. To knowingly print a work that would be considered libelous if Obama was a private man is beyond the pale.

    It is time to boycott Simon and Schuster for this egregious smear!

    ADB

  6. Kibitzer

    August 20, 2008 at 1:38 pm

    churlpat:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6w4Dl8QcY0
    18 June 08, name of Larry Sinclair
    And yes, Nat’l Press Club – sorry. And sorry for not making it more clear that the Corsi reference was only as indicated in this piece by Gailey; I attached the video reference to that subject area.
    Corsi may not have known about this allegation at the time of writing his book.
    Ignored or not, it’s still a grenade, that someone could launch at any time.