ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> TalkLeft

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: TalkLeft

The Ohio Debate's Farakhan Segment

By Jeralyn

ADVERTISEMENTS

During our live-blog of tonight's debate, Big Tent Democrat thought Hillary should have praised Obama when she had a chance to respond to his answer about whether he would reject Lewis Farakhan's support and endorsement. I didn't think she needed to do that. I thought he was trying to have it both ways -- not alienating his Jewish supporters or Farakhan's.

While many think Hillary's distinction between denouncing and rejecting was artificial, Don Frederick at the LA Times disagrees. I think he makes a good case that Obama was waffling. Hillary just called him on it. See below:

Obama: "You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments. I think they are unacceptable and reprehensible. I did not solicit this support. He expressed pride in an African American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can't censor him, but it is not support that I sought. And we're not doing anything, I assure you, formally or formally with Minister Farrakhan.

Russert: "Do you reject his support?"

Obama: "Well, Tim, I can't say to somebody that he can't say that he thinks I'm a good guy."

Frederick says,

True enough, but probably not the answer most Jewish Americans wanted to hear. As a result, Obama risked creating the perception for some that he might be somewhat reluctant to completely throw overboard a controversial leader who is not without some stroke within the black community (witness the 1995 Million Man March).

Clinton clearly saw it that way, and sought to put Obama on the spot. She interjected that, during her initial Senate run in 2000, she was endorsed by a splinter party in New York that "was under the control of people who were anti-Semitic, anti-Israel. And I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. ... And there's a difference between denouncing and rejecting."

Obama responded: "I have to say I don't see a difference between denouncing and rejecting."

He needs to check a dictionary on that.

Afterwards, as Frederick points out, Obama conceded the point and stated he both denounces Farakhan and rejects his support.

"But if the word 'reject' Sen. Clinton feels is stronger than the word 'denounce,' then I'm happy to concede the point, and I would reject and denounce."

It was a smart final move by Obama, but it shouldn't be overlooked that the question was whether he would reject Farakhan's support and it took Hillary calling him out to get him to answer.

Full post as published by TalkLeft on February 27, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 10/31/26 11:11:51)