<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Feasting With Panthers]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/holder_was_right_about_the_new.html" target="_self">Adam Serwer</a> and <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2011/01/the_new_black_panther_case_--.html" target="_self">Jennifer Rubin</a> are still arguing about the New Black Panther Party controversy. In the latest round, Serwer <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/rubin_still_wrong_about_the_nb.html" target="_self">complains</a> about "the feverish alternate universe of racial resentment in which some conservatives seem to reside": It's not just that they casually accuse the president and the  attorney general of being "allies" with a black hate group, it's the  implication that there was some political benefit to this relationship,  as though the black community as a whole is somehow deeply moved by the  NBPP's racial hatred, and the narrowing of the case represents a kind of  quid pro quo. We're supposed to believe that without the racist  rhetoric of the New Black Panther Party, black people would never have  been motivated to go to the polls for Barack Obama?]]></html></oembed>