Airbrushing Rev. Wright
Buried in a Washington Post story about Hillary Clinton’s plan to “ease the housing crisis” is this gem:
[Clinton] spoke not far from the site where Obama last week delivered a rousing address on race -- and her campaign was pleased with the juxtaposition in the hope that blue-collar voters will be swayed more by pocketbook matters than the loftier subject of social harmony.
Do you suppose that the Clinton “campaign” was pleased with the “juxtaposition” of Hillary’s speech and Obama’s because Obama had talked about “lofty” matters “of social harmony?” And do you suppose that if Clinton's operatives somehow were pleased for this reason, they would have confided this to the Washington Post?
Isn’t it more likely that the Clinton campaign was pleased with the juxtaposition of the two speeches because, in his, Obama was reduced to trying to explain his long-time close relationship with an anti-white bigot? And isn’t it likely that the Washington Post reporters (Anne Kornblut and Jon Cohen) are projecting their own opinion of (or wishful thinking about) Obama’s speech onto the Clinton campaign, which surely takes a less fawning view?
If not, why don’t we see an actual quotation from someone in the Clinton campaign, rather than a characterization? Maybe because the Post didn’t want the name Jeremiah Wright to appear in its story.
ANOTHER THOUGHT: The Post also throws Pennsylvania voters under the bus. The assumption (attributed to the Clinton campaign) is that they have little interest in, and may even be put off by talk of, social harmony. But, of course, what they may be put off by is an anti-American preacher of hate and a presidential candidate who won't disavow him.
