So Richard Cohen has written an op-ed piece where he essentially calls Obama an angry black anti-Semite, except he does it like any proper concern troll would:

I don’t for a moment think that Obama shares Wright’s views on Farrakhan. But the rap on Obama is that he is a fog of a man. We know little about him, and, for all my admiration of him, I wonder about his mettle. The New York Times recently reported on Obama’s penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting “present” when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, “present” will not do.

Fair enough. One would hope that Obama would be pretty forthright in speaking out, although I suspect that (up to now) it is a matter that would be pretty far down on his “to do” list. After all, it wasn’t Obama who lauded Farrakhan, it was Obama’s preacher. Or more specifically, Obama’s preacher’s magazine. Or more specifically, Obama’s preacher’s magazine which is run by Obama’s preacher’s daughters. And it wasn’t last week or last year or even last decade. It was in 1982.

Got that?

So, to recap: Obama’s preacher’s daughter’s magazine gave Farrakhan an award over 25 years ago last year and now Obama must explain whether or not he agrees with that award. Or, I presume, else.

Or, I presume, it will mean he is an angry black anti-Semite.

Fair enough. I’d be mildly interested in hearing Obama’s take on that. After all, if he can’t answer to the likes of Richard Cohen now, how’s he going to fight Rudy Giuliani or John McCain or Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee when they play the race card this summer and fall? Because, make no mistake: they will, because that’s what they do.

This is how the race card gets played: Obama is black. He represents an unknown quantity. Furthermore, Obama speaks about “change.” Change is unsettling even when the candidate is a WASP. “Heavens! We can only imagine what it means when a black man says it.” Unsettlement leads to fear. Fear leads to other emotions such as dislike and even hatred.

Bottom line: Negative emotions like these are what cause people to vote against a candidate.

So let’s not kid ourselves as to what Cohen’s piece is about. It isn’t about Farrakhan or Rev. Wright. It’s about fanning the flames of fear, uncertainty and doubt about a strong Democratic candidate for president who represents the kind of change that Cohen (and his readers) do not want.

And now a word about Cohen. This piece sheds more light on the kind of person Cohen is than the kind of person Obama is. Obama can never say that, of course, so I will. Cohen has seen fit to turn the valve on a tanker truck full of poison gas and let escape a toxic cloud into the political atmosphere. Ask yourself: what kind of person does that?

In a strange way, Cohen’s diatribe has more in common with Farrakhan’s modus operandi than anything you could possibly imagine coming from Barack Obama.

So, according to Cohen, Obama is an angry black anti-Semite until he proves otherwise. Now you can decry that kind of gamesmanship, but (as the Lake Superior State University English department would NOT like you to say) “it is what it is.”

It’s up to the rest of us to shine a light on the likes of Richard Cohen and expose what he’s trying to do.

P.S. All those “present” votes that Cohen decries? Here’s the real story:

The votes were actually part of a strategy developed by Planned Parenthood to stop Republican attacks on pro-choice candidates. “We had a very astute and devious Republican leader that we knew was using abortion votes as wedge issues, putting those votes into mailers to help defeat pro-choice Democrats,” Pam Sutherland, president and CEO of Illinois Planned Parenthood, told reporters on the call. “It was our strategy, Planned Parenthood’s, to decide that a “present” vote was the same thing as a “no” vote.” Then-State Senator Obama “was always ready to vote “no” on these bills but he understood how it important it was to help his fellow colleagues,” Sutherland continued. Obama “was key to the strategy… not only did Democrats follow suit, so did many Republicans. The strategy actually worked… very few of those bills actually made it into law.”

I guess no good deed goes unpunished.

UPDATE: Obama has released this statement this afternoon:

I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet Magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree.