I have had the 60 Minutes argument with a whole bunch of people by now, and no one has yet managed to convince me that Hillary Clinton saying "No" to two questions asking her if she believed Barack Obama was a Muslim constituted a secret, subliminal "yes." In fact, I perceived her answer to both questions to have been emphatic, not only saying that no, she didn't believe it, but also that there was "no basis" for that belief, and that she took Obama at his word. Then when the question was asked again — the same question, asked again — I took her response to be equally emphatic, though with a touch of incredulous at being asked a second time. The "as far as I know" seemed to me to be in response to the repeat question, as in, why are you asking me again, is there something I'm missing?
This was how I interpreted it. Apparently the person who posted it on YouTube with the heading "Hillary Clinton Stokes False Rumors about Obama's Faith" felt differently. Here it is for your reference:
I missed the actual airing of this so I didn't know until I read Eric Boehlert account of the exchange and evaluation of the media coverage that followed. Here's the full transcript, per Boehlert:
The fact is, if you look at Clinton's exchange with Kroft in its entirety, which lasted less than one minute, I count eight separate times in which she either plainly denied the false claim that Obama was Muslim, labeled that suggestion to be a smear, or expressed sympathy for Obama having to deal with the Muslim innuendo. Eight times:
CLINTON: Of course not. I mean, that's--you know, there is not basis for that. You know, I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that.
KROFT: And you said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not a Muslim.
CLINTON: Right. Right.
KROFT: You don't believe that he's a Muslim or implying? Right.
CLINTON: No. No. Why would I? No, there is nothing to base that on, as far as I know.
KROFT: It's just scurrilous --
CLINTON: Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors. I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind of rumors that go on all the time. [Emphasis added]
When I saw the full exchange I became even more confused. Seriously, how on earth does that exchange somehow mean that Hillary Clinton was secretly sliming Obama? Maybe I'm not very bright, but I truly, truly can't see it.
But I could see what Boehlert painstakingly catalogues in his piece. I noticed a number of his examples myself: Characterizations of that exchange that characterized Clinton as Machiavellian, or not protesting enough, or not firm enough, or somehow not saying the right thing (even though I think she covers most of the necessary bases: No basis in fact; no basis in belief; upholding Obama's word; calling such rumors "ridiculous" and "smears."). Boehlert cites a number of examples in print and on TV — Bob Herbert, Harold Myerson, Carol Marin, Ryan Lizza, Niall Stanage, Andrea Mitchell, Margaret Carlson — all of whom criticized Clinton's response to the question without mentioning that her first response had been "Of course not."
I need to be crystal clear for the angry commenters who will start their pile-on about as soon as I hit "publish" (hi, HowardRoarke with an "e"!): When I point out that the media often makes misstatements and unfair characterizations with respect to Hillary Clinton, that's less about me supporting Clinton than it is me supporting, well, accuracy. Boehlert's column is meticulous and exacting and thoroughly backed by numerous examples, and I think it's important to highlight it here so it doesn't just go unnoticed. When Boehlert says "When people suggest that the press employs a separate standard for covering Clinton, this is the kind of episode they're talking about," I can't help but agree, because I noticed it too, the way I noticed the fairytale thing — twice — and the way I noticed Charlie Gibson completely making up the news here* and how odd it was to be demanding a Clinton exit pre-Texas and Ohio here. It's not the popular position to take these days — trust me on that one! — but it's one I can't help taking when I see that something isn't being represented accurately or fairly. So, I'm backing Boehlert up here. Check out his post, I think it's worth reading.
Hillary Clinton, 60 Minutes, and the Muslim question [Media Matters]
What I Did See On 60 Minutes, And Still Consider To Be The Most Important Takeaway From That:
That Other "60 Minutes" Story: About 47 Million Uninsured Americans Desperate For Health Care [ETP]
*I didn't end up publishing this post because it was wiped so completely off the agenda by the McCain story, as I mention. Posts get timed out all the time — hazards of blogging, publish or languish — but it's been nagging at me ever since and I'm glad to publish it, even retroactively. This stuff shouldn't go unnoticed.