Denounce, reject, tomayto, tomahto?

Posted By Blake Hounshell Tuesday, February 26, 2008 - 11:49 PM Share

Tim Russert, one of two moderators for Tuesday night's debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, pressed the latter on his views on the views of Louis Farrakhan. What followed was the only light-hearted moment of an otherwise tense, combative night:

The tone settled down thereafter, flaring only briefly when Obama said he “denounced” Minister Louis Farrakhan’s long history of anti-Semitic statements but hesitated to “reject” Farrakhan’s support. Clinton said Obama needed to take a stronger stance.

“If Senator Clinton thinks that ‘reject’ is stronger than ‘denounce,’ then I’m happy to concede the point, and I both reject and denounce” Farrakhan’s support, Obama said to scattered laughter in the hall.

EXPLORE:DECISION '08, POLITICS

(1)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

AJLONGINI

5:05 PM ET

February 27, 2008

What? I think Senator

What? I think Senator Clinton was completely right to point out the distinction. There is a difference between denouncing something and rejecting it, especially when it comes to the support of a bigot.

You can have reservations about or criticize the positions of your supporters (i.e. denounce them) yet fully accept their endorsement, as Obama has done with Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

To divest from their support is rejection, and that is what Clinton was calling for with regards to Louis Farrakhan.

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.