|
Recorder columnist naive about Obama campaign
Editor, The Recorder,
Although a resident of Bath County for only three years, I consider the Highlands of Virginia to truly be God's country and an area that I hope to have the blessing of returning to in retirement if not sooner.
My whole family enjoys receiving The Recorder each week in order to keep up with our beloved Bath County, but the last issue had such a one-sided and obviously biased piece of fiction that I had to respond.
I recognize that we all have opinions and believe it is a privilege to live in a county where we have freedom of speech. With that in mind, I certainly believe that (Recorder writer) Jim Jacenich is welcome to his opinion, but if a paper is going to have such a biased presentation of so-called facts, then I believe it is only right to give the opposing view.
In Mr. Jacenich's column, "Hoped for change is coming, but not without a price," it is obvious that Mr. Jacenich's true calling is in the realm of fiction. Before adding a little balance, reality and reason to Mr. Jacenich's column, I would like to say, that as an American, President-elect Obama will be my president come January even though I did not vote for him. I will pray for both him and his family to have safety and wisdom.
I certainly celebrate the fact that an African-American has been elected President; however, I think that there are more qualified African-Americans that I would have chosen above President Obama. A few that come to mind are Condoleezza Rice, Collin Powell, Michael Steele, J.C. Watts, Andrew Young and Jim Clyburn. I believe that the reason that good people questioned Obama's associations, dreams and passions is because we did not have any idea how to define them. Because of his lack of experience or specifics as to what they were and how they were formed, people wanted to know more and have some level of explanation. This is not a personal attack; it is trying to reasonably vet a candidate for office.
Are we now saying that if a candidate, either Republican or Democrat, has associations with terrorists (Ayers), fascist, racist, oppressors, murderers, etc., that we should not question those associations and seek to gain more information? Ayers meets at least one of those descriptors, if not more. I, for one, would still like the opportunity to understand the level of association he and Obama had, and thoroughly vet it. This becomes even more important when someone has not been on the national, public scene long enough to have a consistent record against which to balance the association.
Just because someone claims that they are going to be attacked because of their race does not mean that they actually will be attacked. When President-elect Obama said he would be attacked because he did not look like others on a dollar bill, he raised the race card. I ask for Mr. Jacenich to please cite examples of his supposed "litany of false accusations." Please give an example of one racial slur, one veiled threat, or an example of outright slander that was directed toward President-elect Obama by McCain, his campaign or surrogates. I reiterate that being told that Republicans would utilize racial slurs is not the same as doing so. There was one party utilizing the race card, but that was the Democratic Party, through Obama and surrogates like Representative John Murtha.
Returning to the supposed point of your story of recognizing women, why not be truthful about who was attacked based on family, heritage, associates, dreams and passions? The attacks made by the Obama campaign, the one that did not lower itself to "petty accusations and outright lies," on Sarah Palin were detestable. Promoting stories that Gov. Palin's son Trig was actually the son of her oldest daughter were despicable. Oh, but Obama's campaign was honorable.
Proposing that someone from Alaska who enjoys hunting, but was not educated in Northeastern elitist schools has to be ignorant, is an attribute of an honorable campaign and certainly not an attack on the "heritage, associates, dreams and passions" of Gov. Palin. I must also be ignorant because her background seems a lot like the folks that I know and came to love in the Highlands. Actually, it sounds a lot like mine own background, etc.
Of course Obama, his campaign and surrogates did not limit their attacks to Gov. Palin. The attacks on John Mc- Cain's war record were disgusting. This was the treatment Obama and surrogates gave to McCain, someone who has served his country and who has scars and physical limitations as a result of his service. Additionally there were the innuendos that he was brainwashed while in Hanoi and is actually controlled today by the Vietnamese. Then there was the assertion that he had cost the government millions of dollars by allowing a Navy plane to be shot down over Viet Nam. Somehow, according to Mr. Jacenich, Obama, his campaign and surrogates only made statements of fact and did not call into question McCain's sense of duty or patriotism.
It was amazing how any slight misstatement by Mc- Cain was portrayed as the onset of Alzheimer's. When Biden made a gaffe, it was just Biden being Biden. When Obama commented on the 57 states in the union, it was because he was tired. Based on Mr. Jacenich's assertion that Obama's was an honorable campaign that did not resort to smears, our only assumption can be that McCain must be senile. Remember, according to Mr. Jacenich, Obama only used facts.
I am not saying that John Mc- Cain's was a perfect campaign without any improper assertions, but it is obvious that neither was Obama's campaign. At a minimum, I respectfully call on Mr. Jacenich to come clean. I hope that Mr. Jacenich is just naive and failed to search the facts instead of being less than truthful with himself and the readers of The Recorder. I also ask the editor of The Recorder to at least attempt to give some balance in its editorials.
Frank Heinsohn
Corning, N.Y.
No comments have been posted. Be the first!
|
