In less than one day, the Hagedorn campaign in Minnesota's First Congressional District has gone from claiming reviewed ads paid the NRCC to telling the press they have no control over the independent expenditure commercials. The candidate himself engages in classic whataboutism aimed at local clergy.
One constant remains: the campaign agrees with the anti-Soros message that's been condemned by local clergy, as well as state-wide and national Jewish groups.
On Thursday, we noted in Hagedorn campaign embraces NRCC's anti-semitic anti-Soros ad condemned by Jewish Community Relations Council:
Now the campaign of his Republican opponent, Jim Hagedorn, defends the ads that leaders in Minnesota's Jewish communities are condemning, John Molseed reports in Hagedorn campaign defends anti-Soros ad at the Rochester Post Bulletin:
In portraying Soros as a controlling hand, the ad plays into far-right conspiracy theories that spring from anti-Semitic prejudices, according to national spokespeople for groups including the Anti-Defamation League.
“This ad and all of our ads are made irrespective of religion, [Gregg Peppin, spokesman for 1st District Republican candidate Jim Hagedorn] said. “Our ads are policy-based.” . . .
It's also interesting that the Post Bulletin reports that the Hagedorn campaign has control over the ad, which is paid for by the NRCC:
Peppin didn’t say whether Hagedorn and his campaign have specifically considered stopping the ad but said the campaign’s ads and its message are continuously reviewed. [emphasis added]
The time-stamp on the article at the Post Bulletin is "updated 22 hours ago" as we compose this post (see screengrab at the top of this page.
The Post Bulletin is an afternoon paper, but online copy often appears before the print edition hits the street. The copy we quote above remains the same online.
In online editions of the chain that posts at southernminn.com (subscription required for most articles), Philip Weyhe reported in Local clergy denounce 'anti-Semitic' messaging in Hagedorn ad; campaign pushes back, an article update nine hours before we started composing this post. The Hagedorn campaign has a much different story to share with the media:
Several local clergy signed a letter released Tuesday, calling for Republican 1st Congressional District candidate Jim Hagedorn to denounce what they’re labeling ‘anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant’ campaign ads running on his behalf.
Hagedorn and his team are pushing back, noting the ads were produced by an outside group and saying that they were not intended to attack any religion. . . . .
Hagedorn, in an interview with Northfield News, noted, “It’s not my ad.” He pointed out that his campaign did not fund the advertisement and said he doesn’t believe the point of the ad is to deliver anti-Semitic messaging.
“It’s pointing out that Dan Feehan, personally and through his campaign, is being supported by a very liberal person,” Hagedorn said.
Hagedorn personally introduces a textbook "whataboutism" defense:
Hagedorn said his team doesn’t believe the NRCC ads are airing anymore but did not denounce them. He said that claims of anti-Semitism would be better focused against Democratic Attorney General candidate Keith Ellison, who he said has ties to other anti-Semitic figures.
Hagedorn’s campaign manager, Gregg Peppin, added “we condemn anti-Semitism in all forms” and reiterated the ads were aimed at the “financing” of Feehan’s campaign by George Soros.
Well, that's different. From just hours before--from carefully reviewing ads to disavowing ownership. Here's the screengrab of the time stamp on Wehye's post:
Weyhe reports extensively on the clergy members' views, and those who can access the article should read it. The reporter also provides the Feehan campaign's response:
Feehan’s team, meanwhile, has denied being funded by Soros and is critical of Hagedorn’s connection to the ad.
“Independent fact checkers have rated the claims in this ad false and faith leaders across southern Minnesota have stood up to this dangerous fear-mongering,” Feehan Campaign Manager Sean Oyaas said. “Southern Minnesotans deserve better than this false and hateful rhetoric and it’s disturbing that Jim Hagedorn refuses to condemn it.”
For those readers who don't know much about "whataboutism," we recommend Merriam Webster's read about the history of the term and its practice. Here's the definition:
Some of the terms we use to describe political rhetoric are as old as politics itself (see ad hominem attacks, or such devices as synecdoche, metonymy, or zeugma). Others are more recent additions, driven by the evolution of the news cycle (like fake news and dog whistles).
But hey, aren’t we ignoring a bigger subject here? How can we talk about rhetorical devices and not mention whataboutism?
Whataboutism gives a clue to its meaning in its name. It is not merely the changing of a subject ("What about the economy?") to deflect away from an earlier subject as a political strategy; it’s essentially a reversal of accusation, arguing that an opponent is guilty of an offense just as egregious or worse than what the original party was accused of doing, however unconnected the offenses may be.
The tactic behind whataboutism has been around for a long time. Rhetoricians generally consider it to be a form of tu quoque, which means "you too" in Latin and involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of rather than refuting the truth of the accusation made against you. Tu quoque is considered to be a logical fallacy, because whether or not the original accuser is likewise guilty of an offense has no bearing on the truth value of the original accusation.
Nice try, Mr. Hagedorn.
Screengrabs: Timestamps on the online versions of stories at the Post Bulletin and Southerminn.com websites, captured between 9:00 and 10:00 am Friday. December 2.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the paypal subscription button.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
Comments