In an example of the lowest of lowbrow political discourse, Lewis Diuguid, a columnist for Midwest Voices, a website sponsored by the Kansas City Star, has accused John McCain and Sarah Palin of using "an old code" word.  Apparently the "socialist" description that both have used of Obama's economic agenda isn't really about economics:  it's a racist "code word for black".  As "evidence" of his claim, Mr. Diuguid cites examples of former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover using the term to describe African-American activists such as Paul Robeson and W.E.B. Dubois — both of whom were members of the American Communist Party.  Of course, Mr. Diuguid ignores that his examples actually were socialists, self-avowed ones at that, instead claiming that the term was applied to his examples because they worked for equal rights for African-Americans.  His ignorance is appalling.  He cites no evidence, of course (because none is available) that black activists were termed "socialist" on the basis of civil rights struggles rather than political ideology, and he also cites no evidence (again, none being available) that the term was only used in reference to African-Americans.

Perhaps Mr. Diuguid isn't particularly adept at using a dictionary.  A quick check online finds the following definition of socialism:  "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy."  The dictionary gives no "code word" definition of socialist.  Is Senator Obama's proposed agenda of a national health care plan, "windfall profits tax" on oil companies (the proceeds to be sent to citizens as "rebate" checks), higher personal and business income taxes, higher taxes on dividends, interest, and capital gains, and increased regulation of the economy not consistent with the formal, non-"code" definition?  Apparently facts and definitions aren't important in Mr. Diuguid's world — only race is.

Diuguid is not the only one proposing that opposition to Obama's candidacy is based on race.  Pennsylvania Congressman Jack Murtha recently opined that "[t]here is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area."  He later referred to the people living there as "rednecks".  Interesting assessment.  Perhaps that explains why Democratic Ed Rendell, who is white, did so well in Pennsylvania's westernmost counties in the 2006 gubernatorial election against Republican Lynn Swann, who is black.  Is Rep. Murtha then saying that Pennsylvania Democrats are racist?  What about his own endorsement of Hillary Clinton in the primaries over Barack Obama — since Murtha is himself from western PA, are we to infer that his endorsement was based on racism?

There will no doubt be people who vote against Obama simply on account of his race, just as there will certainly be votes in his favor because of race.  It is insulting to the political process, and even to Senator Obama, to suggest that any opposition to his policies or his candidacy is based in racial bias.  We deserve better political discourse than that provided by Messrs. Diuguid and Murtha.