Obama supporter Mary Mitchell at the Chicago Sun-Times is the latest surrogate to attack Clinton over her criticism of Barack Obama's condescending remarks in San Francisco. Seems like a little Hick Hate by Obama goes a long way...
Mitchell spins Obama's comment as innocuous and something he's said before, then attacks. Let's look at how she wields her sword against Clinton in her column titled "Hillary again playing the race card":
The fallout over Obama's "bitter" comment fits that same pattern.
He's quoted as saying: "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Obama was apparently referring to rural voters, a demographic he has had difficulty reaching.
The comment is being characterized by some pundits, Clinton and the GOP nominee John McCain as "elitist," and evidence that Obama is "out-of-touch" with ordinary Americans.
But during his bus tour through Pennsylvania two weeks ago, Obama made the same point at several town hall meetings and crowds applauded.
Although he may not have used the exact same words that have caused such a furor, he offered the same assessment: When people believe they are getting a raw deal, they become bitter.
By framing her attack on Clinton as being over the word "bitter," Mitchell is then able to cite previous examples of instances where Obama used the same sentiment and wasn't criticized, as evidence that Clinton has been unfair in her criticisms.
Oh, wait a minute - my bad, Mitchell did nothing of the sort. She didn't cite a single instance where Obama expressed the same sentiment in the past, she just inferred there were times -- and you can trust her, she's impartial, right?
And besides, with the entire resources of the major, big-city newspaper like the Chicago Sun-Times and its staff behind at her disposal you don't really expect her to be able to pull up any actual quotes from Obama...
After all, she's only lambasting a U.S. Senator with the accusation of a racially-motivated attack against her beloved Obama -- you don't expect her to actually act like a journalist, do you?
By latching onto the word "bitter," Obama-licking Mitchell has dismissed the rest of Barack's hateful message, namely that small-town Americans "cling to religion and guns" out of their "desperate situation."
Having conveniently re-framed Obama's rude arrogance, Mitchell is then free to attack Clinton as using the race card in her criticism of Obama without actually having to defend Obama at all. After all, all Barack did was refer to Americans as "bitter," right?
In attacking Obama as "elitist" and "arrogant," Clinton is again appealing to the lower nature of voters.
She has once again proved that she is willing to feed the ignorance of voters like the ones Rendell has described.
But worst yet, Clinton is now communicating to these voters that she that can put an "uppity" black man in his place.
Mitchell's hateful attack on Clinton is as wrong as Obama's dismissive arrogance towards small-town Americans, and a perfect example of the kind of bias still very prevalent in the press coverage of the Democratic race.
Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!