Clinton Campaign Affirmative Action Dog Whistles

First, watch Keith Olbermann's special commentary:



A "special comment" about his Special Comment. Clearly KO is taking this stance reluctantly, and quite possibly personally prefers Hillary to Barack. The passion with which he makes his plea is all the more compelling because it's real.

All that said, I don't buy for a second the idea that this was an "out of control" moment in the Clinton campaign. I think this was a carefully scripted, well polled dog whistle to the white blue collar workers in Pennsylvania, well timed to not impact any other race that might vote in sympathy to Obama (the outcome in Mississippi was never in question).

This is how it works: "Everybody" (white working class and lower middle class workers) knows "somebody close to me" (anecdotal evidence by an unreliable witness) who "lost a job opportunity" (didn't get hired) because "some g*******d n****r" (fill in the blank yourself) who "didn't deserve the job" (wasn't part of "everybody's" social circle and had a different culture) "took advantage" (had the playing field partly leveled) of affirmative action (no code needed here).

So in six weeks, at the Pennsylvania primary, much of this flap will be forgotten by everyone except us political junkies who blog about it. However, the accusation that Obama is an "affirmative action" candidate and "doesn't deserve" the Presidency will stick in the minds of the dogs Clinton was whistling at. Some media have reported that Obama's campaign was "stunned" by this. I certainly hope not. They have six weeks to turn this back on the Clinton campaign by somehow keeping the high ground (critical to Obama's chances) and defusing this baseless, racist accusation.

This is part of a pattern Clinton has had for at least several months. Through damning with faint praise, offering the vice presidency as if it were hers to offer, and refusing to clearly denounce baseless rumors about Obama's religious preference, she has established a pattern of allowing others to be her attack dogs, while her own hands remain relatively clean. Having observed that pattern, I cannot see any other way to interpret this other than as an intentional dog whistle.

That said, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that upon reflection, I do not believe that Obama's famous statement that "periodically", "when she's feeling down".... "Hillary attacks" was an intentional dog whistle. I have been paying close attention to his campaign style, and I am in the middle of reading The Audacity of Hope, and I have come to the belief that the statement was said in a very typical (for him) style of trying to (sometimes stretching to) be utterly fair in any negative statements he makes about political opponents. When I first heard the statement, I thought it was a stretch, but it never occurred to me that he might be dog whistling about PMS (especially since Hillary is almost certainly post-menopausal) until I saw the idea spread across the internet. I honestly believe that the misogyny that has occasionally crept into his campaign (and no, I don't deny that there has been some) is the sort of misogyny that men in our culture bathe in daily and are generally not conscious of.

That (perceived) lack of intentionality matters to me. Obama is quite possibly the most self aware politician I have ever encountered, and it strikes me that he makes significant attempts to be pro-feminist and falls short, as many allies do. I also suspect that over time he is becoming more, not less pro-feminist, and more, not less self-aware. Hillary, on the other hand, seems to becoming more calculating and more intentional in her attacks. As some have pointed out, she has even used the word "partisan" to describe the contest between herself and Obama as though they are in rival parties, and not both Democrats.

I'll have more on my impressions of Obama after I finish reading his book. At this point, I can say I have never read anything quite like it, and I like what I'm reading. Oh, and his writing ability and thought process both are clear indications that he got where he is on merit and a little luck, like the rest of is. It's not his novelty as a black man that's so refreshing, it's his novelty as a self-aware man that believes that the political process starts and ends with listening to his constituency that's so refreshing.