By falsely accusing Clinton of playing the "race card," Wash. Post columnist Meyerson himself fueled "race card" politics he calls "despicabl[e]"
SUMMARY: In a blog post on the American Prospect website, Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson falsely accused Sen. Hillary Clinton of playing the "race card." Meyerson described a phone call a friend in Los Angeles had received in which a "gentleman with a very exaggerated, old style -- Amos 'n Andy, in fact -- black pattern of speech ... sing[s] the praises of Barack Obama." Without any evidence to support his accusation or any indication that he had attempted to contact the Clinton campaign, Meyerson pronounced the phone call "a Clinton ploy against Obama."
On February 2, blogger Taylor Marsh highlighted a blog post on the American Prospect website by Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson that was headlined "Hillary Plays the Race Card." In the American Prospect post, Meyerson described a phone call that a friend of his in Los Angeles received from what Meyerson described as "a high-decibel gentleman with a very exaggerated, old style -- Amos 'n Andy, in fact -- black pattern of speech, singing the praises of Barack Obama." Without any evidence to support his accusation or any indication that he had attempted to contact the Clinton campaign, Meyerson pronounced the phone call "a Clinton ploy against Obama." In making the allegation -- which the Clinton campaign called "outrageous and baseless" and "completely false" -- Meyerson himself was advancing the "race card" narrative, which he labeled "despicabl[e]" when falsely accusing the Clinton campaign.
The original Meyerson item has, in Marsh's words, "been scrubbed from the American Prospect website." Marsh wrote further:
Meyerson makes the leap, without one single fact, that Clinton's campaign was the one who is "playing the race card discreetly -- and despicably." The title of his post blames Hillary personally, again without any proof. The comments roundly slammed him, even demanding that he take the post down, offer a retraction, but also included a few of the usual Hillary hating suspects. Now you also can no longer see the comments that attack Meyerson. [emphasis in original]
Though the original Meyerson post has been taken down, Meyerson has posted a second item on the phone call, this one headlined "The Race Card in L.A., Part 2." Meyerson wrote:
My post occasioned some indignation when I surmised the call came from operatives working for some organization that supported Hillary Clinton. I'm sure it didn't come from the Clinton campaign itself, and I have no reason to think the campaign knew about it.
Meyerson's assertion that he "surmised the call came from operatives working for some organization that supported" Clinton is at best a distortion. While in his original post he mentioned the possibility that groups supportive of Clinton might be responsible, Meyerson first accused the campaign, blaming Clinton herself in the headline. He also referred to the call as a "Clinton ploy" and a "Clinton Dirty Trick." Moreover, he did not in any way acknowledge having made the accusation; indeed, now he essentially denies having made it by saying that "I'm sure it didn't come from the Clinton campaign itself."
As Marsh noted, the Prospect subsequently posted a version of Meyerson's original item that states at the end: "This post has been edited since it was originally posted -- The Editors." The headline of the edited post has been changed from "Hillary Plays the Race Card" to "The Race Card," presumably "Part 1" to the "Part 2" Meyerson posted. While the direct accusation of a "Clinton ploy" has been deleted, the phrase "a Clinton Dirty Trick" has been replaced with "a dirty trick," and an editors' note indicates the Clinton campaign denies having made the calls, the item still includes the strong suggestion that a "campaign" was involved:
When I lived in L.A., I occasionally got calls that purported to be from one campaign but were actually from another, presumably pitched to the leading ethnic group in my neighborhood (Jewish), but calculated to inflame Jews against the candidate the caller claimed to support. Looks like the same thing is happening now in selected neighborhoods.
What in the world has happend to Harold? he used to be so good. Maybe Daily Howler's nailing last week has got to him.
One of the problems in L.A. lately has been hateful 'stealth' calls and mailers that are designed to make voters think that the other side did it, and to antagonize them into voting the opposite.
As such, how does Myerson not know that this kind of offensive call came from Obama supporters instead, in an effort to antagonize people?
p.s. myerson alludes to possible stealth factor in the call, but he should have realized right away that this is standard ploy in L.A. politics nowadays, rather than hem and haw.
But obviously, some campaign made the call, so I don't understand MMFA's inference that Myerson is totally without basis...
As it happened, the TPM staff did some reporting, and tracked down the guy who was making these calls, and he had nothing to do with Obama. But if I were lazy, and I really didn't like Obama, I would automatically blame those calls on him, because, well, those Chicago politicians are just like that, and do you know the name Rezko? And how dare Obama say that! Meyerson makes a hundred assumptions here, because, frankly, it is permissible in "progressive" circles to say whatever you want about the Clintons. (It's the big secret of the Obama campaign, in fact -- a nasty campaign that manages to look clean.) You know, Bill the War Monger, because he stopped the genocide in Bosnia and arranged for the removal of Milosevic by his people, and cruelly figured out a way to bring this about without a single American death. (Yes, some Serbs. But look at what they were up to in Bosnia and Kosovo.) In fact, during the Kosovo campaign, there were two factions united in their disgust for Clinton: the right, who couldn't believe he was "stretching" the army for "nation-building," and the perpetual peaceniks, who can apparently only see American cruelty under any situation.
In other words, it's the Clinton Rules: you can say anything you damn well want, because it's the Clintons.
You guys are not familiar with the new trend in Los Angeles politics, which is where operatives close to one campaign float vicious mailers and phone calls in order for them to backfire on the other campaign-- people think they are from them instead.
It's happened a number of time in local elections and it works every time-- it inflames voters against the supposedly sponsoring candidate.
These calls obviously came from somewhere-- Myerson is not wrong to note this. Most likely they were Obama people-- this kind of thing-- unfortunately-- has tended to originate from the more progressive candidates.
For MOST people, it's a good policy to keep your mouth shut if you don't know any facts, or what you're talking about.
For a JOURNALIST, failure to do so should be accompanied by a PINK SLIP. Swift and sure.
Because he hates Clinton, this sounds just like something she'd do....so it doesn't matter if its true or not. Most of these guys are bat sh*t crazy in one way or another. I would trust a drunk bum's rambling more than I would Meyerson.
If he didn't work for a corrupt rag in the first place I would say make him prove the phone call and do some research or fire him.