Uppity Negro
Say what?
Sorry for the hideous phrase, but that's really the problem here, and it's what they mean when they say they want their country back. They want back that country that always had white Presidents. The idea of "one of them" being the leader, the senior, the Commander in Chief, Number 1, is unbearable.
It was tolerable, sort of, during the campaign, and that's what Sarah Palin wanted to say when she wasn't allowed to give a speech the night they lost the election: not being too bright, she would have railed that the vote was nothing but a distracting warmup, with the real struggle to only now begin by gum (so don't think some piddly little election mattered for much!). You betcha!
They never really grapsed (they're not
too bright either) that day after day they would have to look at his
dark skin and think to themselves, "that's my President."
It galls them to no end and even that doesn't fully describe their
primitivist humiliation and rage. That's partly why words fail them,
Obama is "fascist" or "socialist" or "actually scary" or "Hitler." It calms them not at all to face the horrific fact that he is about 50 times smarter than they.
This is blind fury, being guided to subordinate themselves to such
a being (!!!) and they can't vocalize the odious, putrid real
reason for it. Not when they're sober, anyhow. Incidentally, I
notice commentators are beginning to acknowledge this as the actual
basis, virulent racism that's "always been a factor, of course." Yucch!
That mostly covers what's been going on, unfortunately.
I do believe you are right on most of this.
Lots of two-stepping around it in public discourse, to be sure, and if Clinton or Biden or whoever had been elected instead I think the R's would still be screaming, just different things.
This President, though, well, he just seems to send them around the bend.
I think it's time we dust off "Love it or leave it!" for these clowns, don't you? Forget trying to reason with them. They are immune to the process.
September 4, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, your answer misplaced below, Sir!
September 4, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
What if we made new bumper stickers like,
Americans elected this President
or
You can't have your country back, it never left!
or
Whatever happened to United We Stand?
or
If you don't want single payer,
give back your Medicare!
or
I support Single Payer. I have Medicare!
September 4, 2009 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or how about:
Our President is black, racists are the minority now: get over it!
September 4, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is very good and very funny and very good BTW, Greg!
Best, O.T.
September 4, 2009 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here Gregor:
YOU CAN HAVE YOUR COUNTRY BACK BUT IT TURNED LEFT
HAHAHAHA
September 4, 2009 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah yes ... And do you realize . . .
Three rights make a left . . .
So ... by then those who went left will be continually three blocks ahead.
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 5:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Glenn Beck vision that the Uppity Darkie-in-Chief is training and mobilizing a para-military Darkie Army to run the FRMA-camps to house right-wing dissenters while the Prez takes absolute control of the country is contagious. We know they belong in rubber rooms; they know that we need to be Terminated with Prejudice.
September 4, 2009 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Terminate us with Extreme Prejudice to protect the Co'ssitution, goddammit!
My country shamed by thee
Wet tree of liberty
Lynched from thy branch!
And I say again, Yucch!!
September 4, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Terminate us with Extreme Prejudice to protect the Co'ssitution, goddammit!
My country shamed by thee
Wet tree of liberty
Lynched from thy branch!
And I say again, Yucch!!
September 4, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
"he just seems to send them around the bend."
Yes! This is what is so baffling, so illogical, so unexplainable.
Until, Grouch, you try on a pair of the special goggles they use to look at this!
September 4, 2009 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
OT,
He sends them around the bend because he is a bright, articulate, kind and well intentioned human being. They fear him and his success in any arena. While they nurture and feed off the 'uppity negro' mentality, in reality it is about more than just his 'ethnic' heritage.
They must tear him and his down with lies, distortions and abuse of process because that's all they can do! Truth and integrity is their enemy, while bigotry and fear is their friend.
There is no honor or invocation of truth among bigots and rancid bullies!
September 4, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no problem with Obama except that he nominates people like Van Jones into positions of power. This guy Van Jones decides to bring race into the issue of green jobs. He harps on the "white polluters" and the "white environmentalists steering poison into the people of color communities"
He even likes to use the term "uppity".
C'mon - you just can't make this stuff up. How does this guy get nominated??
I'd rather have Bill Ayers be the Green Jobs czar...
September 4, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't know Van Jones, honestly, so can't comment. Thanks for sharing your views in a polite manner.
September 4, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're welcome
September 4, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, dude. This is the latest Beck/Limbaugh outrage. MCB is a rightwing troll, period. He should either be flamed or ignored.
September 4, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, you are referring to the very real topic/problem of environmental racism?
September 4, 2009 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am referring to the comments made by our "green jobs czar" Van Jones. The same guy who is part of a group which thinks 9/11 was a "cover-up"
September 4, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Burt you accept the idea of environmental racism, Van Jones' idiot comments aside, right?
Meaning, that economic and racial minorities suffer the worst environmental abuses precisely because of their lack of political clout in our system....
September 4, 2009 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm wondering if you've read this, Bill:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/04/defending_van_jones_from_the_mccarthyites/
And if so, what your thoughts are?
September 4, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Lis for the link. I usually avoid reading Nate because his views on unions, the Stimulus and now Van Jones are all incredibly upsetting to me.
He says its nice to have a different "viewpoint" in the White House. Somebody whose "viewpoint" is that the "white polluters" are targeting communities of color is something I don't really appreciate.
And the 9/11 group he is a part of is much more than just accusing the government of "ignoring warnings". This group is promoting investigations into a possible "cover-up" by the government - that the government was somehow involved in blowing up the Twin Towers.
See - Nate is a friend of Van Jones so is spinning it a bit differently.
Van Jones has tried to apologize and disassociate himself with the 9/11 group but I don't think he's being sincere.
September 4, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry about Van Jones ... . McBellow . . .
Here's where the brouhaha has hit the hill and your legislators are hot on the trail.
Apparently, the news source from Beck/Limbaugh has been the source for the following outraged party-of-no Senate megaphone.
I'm sure this dweeb will get to the bottom of the brouhaha for MiddleClassBellow.
Most pressing priority in the whole wild world . . . Anything to stay clear of the real debate on health care.
Maybe this has something to do with 12% poll numbers for the republicans on the hill.
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 5:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
August has been such an awful month for Obama's healthcare debate that the President is probably glad somebody brought this up.
Everybody's ratings are disastrous so that's really not a meaningful point.
And if everybody must be healthcare 100% of the time, then why are you posting about Texas secession?
September 5, 2009 7:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dearest ... McBellow . . .
Your reps and team are looking dumber and dumber everyday . . .
Take my latest blog about the heartless mental case Michael Steele as just the latest example... And this one is related to the health care issue.
WOW! He really exhibits the type of RNC leadership needed by your team to go forward into the future.
Forward into the crapper's more like it...
Oh I know I know. He doesn't speak for you. I guess none of these dweebs speak for you.
You just have a tendency to agree with the majority of their bullshit.
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 9:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
You didn't answer my question. You accuse people of talking about things other than healthcare. So why did you blog about Texas secession?
September 5, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's my answer . . . McBellow . . .
None of your fucking business you twit.
Now what the hell you going to do about that? Call you loser republican rep, or whine that you're some kind of poor put upon victim?
hahahahaha
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just wanted to point out your hypocrisy. You criticize others for discussing non-healthcare issues and there you are blogging about Texas. Way to go.
September 6, 2009 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah ... I bet everyone's concerned . . .
Except the concern is more about your imbecilic idiotic comments and your use of ordering people around like you own the place.
Blow off . . . pip squeak . . .
~OGD~
September 6, 2009 7:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who am I ordering around? You ask me questions that I've tried to answer. And I was just asking for the same courtesy back.
But if you're not going to bother discussing your accusations, then I won't bother answering your questions.
Have a nice day.
September 6, 2009 8:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, yeah, if it weren't for Van Jones you'd be a big Obama supporter. Yeah, right. Nice try though.
September 4, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Supporter? Probably not. But I wouldn't be against him just because of his skin color.
Overreach is trying to accuse me of being anti-Obama because he's black. And that's just silly.
September 4, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
And that is your blind spot Bill. You put everything in terms of "Well it isn't true because I am against him and race has nothing to do with it". The fact is to the majority of people who oppose him, left (my sister and brother-in-law, sadly for example, who up to now have been loyal democratic voters but are now "birthers"), right and center oppose him because of his race.
But since you feel like this post unfairly attacks you in making its point that it is untrue.
September 4, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
You speak for the majority of people that oppose him? Of the 40 something percent of the country that didn't vote for him and now gives him poor ratings, you have spoken with most of these people and they've told you it's because he's black? I oppose to the gross generalizations made by OT on this. Give me a break.
September 4, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe that this out of all proportion anger, the people calling Obama Hitler, the people screaming about Hitler's Youth, is about racism, pure and simple. Why doesn't your party call them on that? Why do you accept that? Let's call racism what is and stop fucking around. That's what this post is about.
September 4, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe that those people you talk about screaming racist slurs don't represent the mainstream out there. They are a very small minority.
September 4, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I am not including you in my generalizations assuming you're not a birther. I disagree with about every time and sometimes we have words. But I have not reason to toss you in with these people.
But *very* small, Bill? Isn't it 20% or so? Close to it anyway?
And the question, why doesn't your party repudiate this odium, seems to me very legitimate.
September 4, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You never used the word "birther". I read it as you were speaking about anybody who disagrees with him. Lots of people are saying they want their country back, not just the small group that are really racists.
I want my country back too. But it has nothing with Obama being black.
September 4, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that raises the question honestly of what the hell you're talking about. You want your country back?
In what exact way? Who took your country and how?
September 4, 2009 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I want my country back, too." Back to what. Bill? Separate drinking fountains? Separate restrooms? Only white need apply? $2.50/hr. wages? Openly restrictive housing covenants? Defacto school segregation? Joe McCarthy screening "communists"? Literacy tests for voting? Local government sanctions of lynchings? Profiling by law enforcement? Explain.
September 4, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not at all. Why would you jump to those conclusions?
To answer your question - I want a country where the government doesn't get more involved in industry. I want reform for certain things like healthcare but not the reform that's being proposed by Congress or Obama. I don't want a country where spending is going to get even more out of control and taxes will go back to rates we saw pre-Kennedy. Many other things but those are two timely points.
September 4, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I appreciate where you're coming from, but you're a little misguided in saying that it's just matter of getting the good ol' times back.
Back before government got involved in industry we had no health and safety standards, no protections for workers injured on the job, no child worker laws, no minimum wage among other things. What we DID have was business that grew discriminantly and ground the middle class to pieces while fostering our monopoly-tastic Gilded Age and bringing on financial panics (eventually the Depression).
My tax rates are LOWER now than they were for my income bracket in the 1950's (and yes, I've done inflation adjustments). In fact, the tax rates for my salary bracket actually DECREASED under Kennedy and Johnson and increased under Nixon (again, if you take inflation into account).
Billy Joel had it right: "the good old days weren't always good and tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems..."
September 4, 2009 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Link would be helpful:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
Sorry 'bout that
September 4, 2009 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome comment, Burnie...I want MY country back, too. I want to go back to when the idea of the president talking to school children didn't cause panic, to when lobbyists didn't own the country lock,stock and barrel, to when all people were created equal, to when everyone had affordable health care, when big companies cared about their employees health and well-being more than obscene profits, to before food companies sold us food that would kill us, and businesses didn't pollute the air and water-ways, to when people had respect for each other, to before there were child molesters in every neighborhood, to when the party that got elected got to advance their agenda, to when politicians did what the majority of their constituents wanted instead of free lancing, and oh so much more...Hmmm....guess I just dreamed up that country.
September 4, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Stilli. I like YOUR country. Can I live there, too??
September 4, 2009 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like I said - you can agree or disagree that history was "better" or "worse" than the present. But that's not the point. The point is that I should be able to wish for the "old days" without being accused of racism and hating a black president.
September 4, 2009 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
But you haven't told us what's good about the "old days." Everything you've tried to list isn't actually GOOD, though. As we knock items off the list one at a time the only thing you're leaving us with is that you liked people having and knowing their place.
Either that or you're longing for something that can't possibly exist ever again which makes you as delusional as Scarlett O'Hara longing for her lost childhood on the plantation.
The past is gone. Instead of whining like a Backstreet Boy about "I want it THAT way," why not put some effort into the future? What do you envision as a future to be proud of? Describe it. Let's identify and work toward that.
September 5, 2009 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I get a kick out of your logic - the past is gone so stop whining.
Let me ask you a question - did you whine about Bush when he was in office? Complain about his policies? Did you whine about Bush Sr. or Reagan?
Assuming you did, what makes your whining OK but not mine?
What was good or bad about the "old days" is a debate over more government versus less.
I'd even love Bill Clinton right now. Remember his 1996 State of the Union where he said the "era of big government is over"?? God bless him.
September 5, 2009 7:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't accuse you of racism, already said that, and you didn't answer my questions. It is per se, suspicious, Bill to aver that somebody took your country away from you when all that happened was the Party that you didn't vote for won at the ballot box, which is why we are inquiring. Is not normal, civil discourse despite whoever you may be hanging out with, with is why we wanted to know more.
September 5, 2009 4:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not normal civil discourse? I know lots of people on here who part of "normal discourse" said that when Obama got into office we finally "saved our country" and took it back from a "dictator" who didn't know anything about the "rule of law". People made it sound like we were living in a banana republic prior to this year. But I bet you never said anything like that.
Your original post up top was completely stereotypical - never using the term "birther".
OT - I'll stop asking you why you're making race such an issue. Of course there are racists in this country. Always have been and always will be. But it's not right to paint everyone who wants their country back as a racist.
But I am curious - what race are you?
September 5, 2009 6:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I don't think I'm being clear. I'm not calling anyone a racist. But I'm genuinely confused when people say "I want MY America back," or "I want the good old days back." What made it their America and what past (or aspects of the past) do you want back? I'm just asking for examples or issues. What is further confusing is when those same people vaguely reference something (taxes, big government) but have no response when their reminded of how those things weren't all good in the good old days.
Bill I don't know you and I don't know what your motives are beyond what you've said. But I really, really want to know what made it the Good Ol Days? What specifically do you want back? And why does it have to be a matter of getting that "back?" Why can we work together for future improvement?
And, thanks for aging me but I was in middle school during the first Gulf War and was six years old when Reagan started his second term, so it's hard to relate to that argument...
September 5, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's your opinion that the things I mention were or weren't good. Government taking a bigger role in healthcare than they have in the past, for example. Government taking a bigger role in cap-and-trade than in the past. Government taking a bigger role in corporate bankruptcies than in the past. There are many points. And they are definitely debatable. But the point here is that for someone to have a viewpoint on these topics that is against the current administration should not make them a racist.
And please answer my question. Did you whine about Bush? You say that I should get over it and stop "whining". You never whined about Bush?
September 5, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I don't know if we have a false equivalency here, I certainly think we do. A three-judge Federal Panel in California, one appointed by W. and one appointed by Reagan, just ruled unanimously that your team made a real dog's breakfast out of the rule of law. That's not Kosfiles, that's the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. And I do think, I am not afraid to say it, that the U.S. Supreme Court has four votes ready to overrule that any day of the week on purely political kangaroo-court grounds, so it would be down to Kennedy as usual. That's my opinion, whatever you may think of it and I respect you if you regard it as highly offensive, I know I would if I were in your shoes.
Have I said other cutting things about Bush that would trouble you? You can check my party affiliation above and other data and you'll have the answer. These are my honest views. Cheney is actually potentially looking at jail time, you realize? (But the four done-deal political votes on S.Ct. plus-maybe-Kennedy analysis above once again applies, as I see it.)
These guys have broken not one law, but many, many laws. Which ones did Obama break? To take your country away from you? I mean those are strong words, right? TOOK AWAY YOUR COUNTRY??? You still haven't answered, and okay, consider it a rhetorical question then.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but let's got get personally racial, okay? I mean no offense and I am not trying to be cute, sincerely. I just don't think it matters what race I happen to be (unless you wanna count native Tasmanian).
September 5, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
You didn't answer my question.
September 5, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey McBellow . . .
Screw answering you.
You're a pushy SOB ... No one owes you crap. What are you the floor supervisor at work or what doing the dirty work for the big boss man? Or maybe you own your own damn business and you're just use to ordering the folks around like they're your chattel.
Maybe a parking lot cop?
hahahaha
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wasn't, Bill. Most people understand who I am talking about, and it certainly isn't people who are Republican because they like business or want less government.
But the "I want my country back" line further below makes me wonder. In elections, power peacefully change hands,you know, in a democracy. The people who lost can feel very dejected, but they don't have to say that someone took their country away from them. Are you being honest with yourself about what the basis of that feeling is? Or are just repeating a line you heard somewhere (I hope)? I'm very serious.
September 4, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm saying, to put it another way, that I want things back to the way they used to be. Be it on healthcare, cap-and-trade, taxes, etc. I don't like the changes that are being pushed through. I'd prefer the country I used to live in.
September 4, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The country of lies leading to wars? Torture? Banking deregulation and collapse? Tripling of the deficit? Rising poverty levels? Loosening of environmental protections? Growing gap between the rich and the poor? Uhhh....let's see what else did Bush Cheney bring us? Oh, I know, the politics of destruction. Yeah, those were the good old days.
September 4, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can argue whether its better or worse, but it's got nothing to do with the color of any president's skin.
September 4, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't I say that "I want my country back" without be accused of racism?
I'm serious. Just like you said you were serious earlier.
September 4, 2009 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're cracking me up a lot today, BTW!
September 4, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your over-generalizations crack me up too!
September 4, 2009 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
That wasn't directed at you, MBC...
Guess I somehow posted in wrong place...
September 4, 2009 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have "no problem with this president" except...
That's Rich! MCB, you are such a fake!
September 4, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I meant to say that I have no problem with the color of his skin. Despite being accused of such.
September 4, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
People like MiddleClassbill will never tell us what they miss about the man they voted for, the concrete accomplishments they recall from the 8 years of the George W. Bush administration, or how getting Saddam made their life in (fill in) more free.
September 4, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like I said, we can argue till we're blue in the face about whether bigger government is better or worse. But I prefer less government, which is what makes me wish we were back in some other administration.
This has nothing to do with Bush. That's what you brought up, not me. I am not comparing Obama to Bush. I would be happy with Bill Clinton back in the White House. Do you remember his 1996 State of the Union address when he said the "era of big government is over"? God bless him.
September 4, 2009 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. There is no argument. You hate our duly elected President because he is "who and what he is." You have shown it abundantly in your writings, and so your false arguments about "I don't care what color he is" would be laughable if not for the damage they do to our country.
Your simple-minded comments are constructed to make yourself seem to be a "simple minded poster." Well, good for you. You have achieved that goal, because your arguments are so lame that I hope your paycheck shows a big deduction;
September 4, 2009 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you're accusing me of hating Obama because he's black? What did I ever say that makes you think I am a racist?
September 5, 2009 7:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's a different topic. Fpie is implying that it was just students and teachers, who would be unlikely to become unruly.
I know people at Harvard and in general the students are white and the non-professor staff (ie housekeeping, food services, maintenance, etc) are all lower class black. The house was right next to campus and therefore it's more than just students and professors who would be walking past the house.
Crowley's account doesn't contradict the tapes necessarily. The caller said on the phone that one man was hispanic and the other she didn't see.
Crowley said that the caller spoke to him and told him directly it was two black men. Could the caller have changed her story and told 911 something different than what she told Crowley? Perhaps. I don't have enough information to have an opinion as to which one is lying. Without knowing the caller or Crowley, it's hard to know which one is telling the truth. But like I said, that's a different topic.
Posted by MiddleClassBill in reply to a comment from jonnienohands
July 27, 2009 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
September 5, 2009 8:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Crowley? Harvard? I think your comment was meant for somebody else. I didn't say anything about Crowley or Harvard on this topic here.
September 5, 2009 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
You ask,
"What did I ever say that makes you think I am a racist?"
I answered.
September 5, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wasn't asking you.
September 5, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well he told you anyway . . .
Whether you asked or not you dimwit!
Is there a wheel missing on your tricycle there McBellow?
hahahahaha
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
MiddleClassBill,
Please cite your sources? Glenn Bleck also makes up stories about Van Jones
I think Van Jones and I have something in common. We both stood up (in San Francisco) during the verdict in Los Angeles after the Rodney King incident and said we are tired of black people being the brunt of police brutality. In my book Van Jones is unworthy of your scorn.
As Eva Patterson says in this article, he was just an legal observer who happen to get caught up in illegal arrest. I too was arrested and the city of San Francisco had to pay us both for illegal arrest.
September 4, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
The link to the article
September 4, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can go on to youtube and listen to his speeches from this year. He says things like "We need to create a green economy that Dr. King would be proud of." It's all about racial equality, not just green jobs. Have a listen yourself.
And there's plenty of sites online where you can see that he signed the petition from 911truth.org. And you don't need to go to Fox News for it, you can go right to the source - http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633
September 4, 2009 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about this one
According to Little Green Footballs, signatories say they were misled. They believed they were signing a petition to further investigate 9/11 and nothing more.
September 4, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
So I guess it's just Jones' word against the organization's. Why should we believe that these people claim to have been misled? It's ironic that the people who are complaining of being misled are self-proclaimed "truthers" themselves.
Did you read the part of the LGF article about his support of the cop killer and the pseudo-science stuff? Obama really knows how to pick them
September 6, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very direct.
Very correct.
That's the whole story for a lot of people, OT. Some just can't get past the skin color thing and never will. And the rest? Growing pains, maybe? I dunno. Obsessive turmoil.
I have been fighting the racist crapola since I was a teenager. This summer I turned 55 years old and became an elder of the tribe. That's elder with a small e. Anyway, I held out hope that we, as a nation, would be beyond this point by now. I always thought I would die a peaceful old woman. It seems I will die an old warrior instead.
Wahnakiwideh.
September 4, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am proud of you that you got to be an elder of the tribe, Flower, and I am grateful that you let some of us here get to know you a bit.
I very much feel for you but I never went through anything like what you have and I don't dare suggest I know what it's like other than to say crapola is an awfully fricking polite expression for what you must face.
We were supposed to be a post-racial society, remember that? I wanted to believe it. I used to live in Washington, D.C. and it was a delight to get far away just to escape the racial tension, I kid you not. And here in the election we had young women cackling "Well, my boyfriend's not too happy that he's black!," hardy-har-har, like that is some sort of normal statement. I can't even believe someone could get that out of their mouth, but they chortled about it.
And now look where we are. *Something*, like the Old Grouch says above, really sends certain people around the bend. We may need some brave elders and warriors to see us through this difficult time.
My greatest respect,
O.T.
September 4, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I feel I need to clarify it better, OT. I became an elder (with a small e) by virtue of age...not wisdom. Tribal members with real wisdom are made Elders (with a capital E).
But, I do understand about the delight in getting away from the racial tension. Hate is a heavy weight, a tremendous burden. I know this from my own weight I carry. And being surrounded by this type of tension is not good for you. By getting away from it, you were probably saving your own spirit. I'm glad you followed your own good sense.
I think it will get better, OT. Some of what is going on now is real racism. Some of it is me, too-ism. And some of it, like I said above, is growing pains. A lot of people are going to have an a-ha moment.
Any day now.
I'm sure of it.
:o)
September 4, 2009 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it has gotten better somewhat, young lady.
We wanted to declare victory, I guess, but we jumped the gun and these people found a way to be bigots and then maintain deniability in all of it:
Why, mercy me, all that I fretted over was that lil' ole Kenyan Al Qaeda birth certificate from Indonesia is all!
September 5, 2009 5:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Which tribe, flower? And congratulations.
September 4, 2009 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anishinaabe.
Congratulations are not really in order here, Wendy, but appreciated. I just managed to live long enough to become recognized for my age is all, not that I acquired any vast amount of knowledge or wisdom. ;o) Now, if it was Elder with a capital E, well, that's a different story.
September 4, 2009 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it great that you have such a handy way to avoid thinking unpleasant and scary thoughts about the effectiveness of the president and Congress?
Simply blame everything on identity politics and - voila! - it works every time.
September 4, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
What the fuck are you talking about? You personify racism with your avatar.
September 4, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's your instinct to stereotype my avatar that personifies racism (whlie we're on identity politics).
September 4, 2009 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
OK, so you explain your avatar to me. I'm waiting.
September 4, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're seriously telling me your version is the only one you can understand without explanation?
September 4, 2009 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I am saying that. Since your comments have always been anti-Obama, my guess is that your avatar was not selected as an act of kindness. Obama emulates Lincoln, for many reasons. So, I am serious that I would appreciate your explaining your avatar to me. Pretend I'm really dumb, maybe that will help.
September 4, 2009 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, need to jump in here. I'm one of the first up front to scream and rant racist if the robe fits. I've never believed that term or any of its' connatation apply to Lalo.
And my take on his avatar is it was a salute to Obama's holding Lincoln in such high regard.
Just sayin'.......
September 4, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Aunt Sam (an unlikely shoutout!!).
There are multiple ways to interpret my avatar, including both positive and highly negative to Obama. That's the reason I picked it in the first place, because it revealed so much about people commenting on it.
And I also happen to think that you can disagree with Obama without being a racist (btw I also disagree with Bush on multiple points without considering him a low-IQ religious fanatic).
That's why I find it ironic that people are so quick to use Obama's race while protesting racism at the same time.
September 4, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt you like to push the envelope as they say, but I still stand by my rationale about your avatar and you.
I disagree with Obama on some things too! That said, I respect him and believe that he is much better than any touted alternative!
September 4, 2009 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are talking in circles. You like to be provocative about race because it shows how people can be racist. People who confront racism are racist. I think that's called tautological thinking. I see that you cannot really explain your avatar, not honestly anyway.
September 4, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You think Bush was a brilliant secularist?
September 4, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is a low IQ whack job. Religious...hard to tell if it was just bluster for votes.
September 4, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interpret?
I have interpreted the avatar as The Black Cat in the Hat.
And interpret the entity behind the avatar as a confrontationalist who normally brings absolutely nothing to a discussion.
Oh wait, That's not totally correct. The Black Cat in the Hat brings little more than an argument for argument sake to a discussion.
Now interpret that!
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 6:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
"They never really grapsed (they're not too bright either) that day after day they would have to look at his dark skin and think to themselves, "that's my President." It galls them to no end and even that doesn't fully describe their primitivist humiliation and rage."
See OT, it is probably morally depraved on my part, but this sentiment gives me solace. Just to know that the dirty bastards are hurting, that they are in pain over this gives me great joy at times.
September 4, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know what you mean, friend, do I ever.
Honestly, for me, it's just very unsettling that we are citizens of a country where this is a popular view ("My boyfriend isn't too wild about him being black," ha-ha-hah!). What in the *hell*?!!
Though I suppose, more in line with what you say, I may feel some guilty pleasure WHEN healthcare passes. And *if* some of them calm down then and reflect on whether it is the right way to go, hating your fellow Americans, and what they really get out of it.
September 4, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It had to be said!
September 4, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was in traffic yesterday and a pickup truck tailgated me very close, laid on the horn, almost hit my bumper, then tore around me. This older WHITE MALE driver then yelled out his window and told me to "f off" and flipped me the bird. I have
an Obama/Biden sticker on my car.
I agree that it is sickening. You get that sick feeling in the pit of your stomach probably something like black Americans got in the civil rights movement when the most dangerous kind of hatred in our nation, that embodied by ignorant white trash, begins to unleash. If we had an Middle Eastern terrorist equivalent in this country, it would be that of the ignorant white trash male. These people also embody true cowards--hiding behind the heath care "debate"
Sarah Palin, and anything place else they can put their "odious, putrid" hatred into when really what it is all about is their utter hatred of black people and that a black man is our president. This eats away at them like an acid.
I spotted my white trash pal yesterday immediately. I can spot them now within seconds. Their faces are twisted and full of hate. They
use their cars or trucks to intimidate. He gunned his engines as he threateningly lurched towards my bumper. Then they intimidate you further knowing full well, they can drive away.
They are hate filled cowards but the most important thing to remember is they ARE our own homegrown terrorists and they need to be watched.
Is the FBI watching our own homegrown terrorists in the making?
And they are not Americans.
They are not Americans.
September 4, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't be so quick to judge, Dogtail. A twisted face could just mean constipation. But, alas, you are probably right!
September 4, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh Oh. Is this a member of the Liberal Police?
Ok. A guy almost hits me, tells me to fuck off and flips me off but I won't "be too quick to judge."
Thank you so much.
This was really helpful. I do need to get another lobotomy. You're right.
September 4, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
WEll I am the liberal police.
Your headlite is out. hahahaha
Bend down and grab your knees
September 4, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Slam on the brakes and let his bigotry buy you a new car.
September 5, 2009 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! ... . Dogtail. . . Liberal Police?
Nope... Just someone with a sense of humor... dripping in sarcasm.
But after having read your favorite quote I sorta of understand. You know, "If you can't see it, then it isn't there."
Around these parts you must set your sarcasm filter on level eight.
And as an old, and I do me old as in dead, drinking buddy of mine once said:
Really . . .
~OGD~
September 5, 2009 6:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
These idiots on the TV stirring up the hate need to travel to a place where there is no government and see how cushy their existence will be when everything disintegrates into chaos. They're not thinking how all their money will not enable them to get food, or that they will be prisoners in their own mansions, if those mansions still even stand. These terrorists are not going to be able to support them in the manner of living to which they have become accustomed. They encourage it's destruction at their own peril.
September 4, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely right! There's no question that the racist hate and fear of millions of ignorant whites is being manipulated and driven by the Repubican right and their allies in the business world. It's not like this wasn't a factor last year, but the Republicans had not figured out how to fully exploit it. Now that they've found the formula they're workin it for all they can. It is a crying shame that Obama and the Democrats are not fighting back though. They appear so weak and wimpy that others who are not driven by this same deep seated racism will start defecting to the forces of evil because they will see him and the Democrats as so ineffective, so incompetent, so impotent that they will not want them in charge any longer. Having said that, it still isn't too late if Obama and company would come out guns a blazin and start kicking ass and taking names. I'm not, however, gonna hold my breath waiting for it to happen since it's extremely unlikely.
September 4, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope they're getting this message by the way and are planning an appropriate response, not just another fluff-a-thon ("Thank you! Next Question?")
Guns a blazin is right!
September 4, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
AMEN oleeb!!!! Time to fight back...high time the racists were called what they are as opposed to them being called 'the loyal opposition'. There is nothing noble about what they are doing so they should not be treated with respect.
September 4, 2009 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
This all has the rotting stink of Rove. Where are the decent people in the Republican Party? Everyone is pointing fingers at the Democrats, but it's not their party pandering to these pyschotics and fanning the flames. WHERE ARE THE DECENT VOICES IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY? I'm yelling because I'm angry.
September 4, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
And in my view, you gotta right to be!!
WHERE ARE THEY???!
September 4, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
and I love you because you're angry. We should all be angry. Liberal Police, please leave us alone.
And I do act on my anger in "constructive ways" but please L.P's, do not shame me for it. Do not even think of it.
What I want to see is some passion FROM YOU NOW.
Put down that self-help book and make a sign for the next "town hall meeting..." Go ahead. You can do it.
Some guy threw a can of half opened Budweiser at my feet at a protest a few weeks ago. So see, it really can pay off.
September 4, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Racism: Not just reenacting the Civil War, living it!
September 4, 2009 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are very correct in making this linkage.
The political dynamics that led to the Civil War were hauntingly similar to what we are now seeing play out before our very eyes. We would do well to learn about it and combat these extremists now so it never reaches that point again. I strongly recommend William Lee Miller's book "Arguing About Slavery" which delves deeply into the political dynamics of national politics leading up to the Civil War. His portrait of the bullying and bellicosity of the pro-slavery politicians and the docile, timid, ever accomodating northerners who comprised the majority is frighteningly familiar. In the end, however, the majority did what was required to check the insane, violent and reactionary forces of the status quo who fought change every step of the way since the signing of the Declaration of Independence decades previous.
I also highly recommend the following excerpt from Chapter 17 in US Grant's memoirs that describe the atmosphere in St. Louis, MO at the outset of the war. Armed traitors had joined together on behalf of the Confederate cause and established a base they called Camp Jackson in the City and intended, I believe, on seizing the Federal armory. United States troops captured them and put an end to that. Grant comments on the atmosphere in the city on that day. To me anyway, it is very easy to imagine that scene because it is so similar to the dynamics we see today and have been seeing the past few decades as the right has gained strength and torn our country down at every opportunity.
Here's the excerpt from Grant:
Up to this time the enemies of the government in St. Louis had been bold and defiant while Union men were quiet but determined. The enemies had their head-quarters in a central and public position on Pine Street, near Fifth--from which the rebel flag was flaunted boldly. The Union men had a place of meeting somewhere in the city, I did not know where, and I doubt whether they dared to enrage the enemies of the
government by placing the national flag outside their headquarters. As soon as the news of the capture of Camp Jackson reached the city the condition of affairs was changed. Union men became rampant, aggressive, and, if you will, intolerant. They proclaimed their sentiments boldly, and were impatient at anything like disrespect for the Union. The secessionists became quiet but were filled with suppressed rage. They had been playing the bully. The Union men ordered the rebel flag taken down from the
building on Pine Street. The command was given in tones of authority and it was taken
down, never to be raised again in St. Louis.
I witnessed the scene. I had heard of the surrender of the camp and that the garrison
was on its way to the arsenal. I had seen the troops start out in the morning and had
wished them success. I now determined to go to the arsenal and await their arrival and
congratulate them, I stepped on a car standing at the corner of 4th and Pine streets, and saw a crowd of people standing quietly in front of the headquarters, who were there for the purpose of hauling down the flag. There were squads of other people at intervals down the street. They too were quiet but filled with suppressed rage, and muttered their resentment at the insult to, what they called, "their" flag. Before the car
I was in had started, a dapper little fellow--he would be called a dude at this day--stepped in. He was in a great state of excitement and used adjectives freely to express his contempt for the Union and for those who had just perpetrated such an outrage upon the rights of a free people. There was only one other passenger in the car besides myself when this young man entered. He evidently expected to find nothing
but sympathy when he got away from the "mud sills" engaged in compelling a "free people" to pull down a flag they adored. He turned to me saying; "Things have come to a pretty pass when a free people can't choose their own flag. Where I came from if a man dares to say a word in favor of the Union we hang him to a limb of the first tree we come to." I replied that "after all we were not so intolerant in St. Louis as we might be; I had not seen a single rebel hung yet, nor heard of one; there were plenty of them
who ought to be, however." The young man subsided. He was so crestfallen that I believe if I had ordered him to leave the car he would have gone quietly out, saying to himself: "More Yankee oppression."
September 4, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry about the weird spacing on the excerpt. I cut and pasted it. It looked okay before I hit submit.
September 4, 2009 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
"after all we were not so intolerant in St. Louis as we might be; I had not seen a single rebel hung yet, nor heard of one; there were plenty of them" US Grant
We have not broken any windows either. :-{)>
September 4, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just wait, until they turn on Republican members, as we saw happen to Rick Perry last week. They may be creating a monster that will get out of control and spawn more government hatred like we saw in Oklahoma!
September 4, 2009 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
This post is a wrongheaded distraction from a true understanding of Obama's opponents. I believe in knowing our enemies for what they truly are.
The notion that racism is the driving force behind Republican opposition to Obama is appealing because it affords Democrats an opportunity to attribute the worst possible motives to conservatives and simultaneously offers a unified explanation for the rise of Far Right extremist groups, instances of racial hatred, and Republican attacks on Obama's agenda and legitimacy.
But don't fall for the racism-explains-it-all theory.
Yes, some on the Right ARE racists. But here's the wider explanation for fierce opposition to this president:
1. Republicans lost the White House, Senate and House by HUGE margins in the last two-and-a-half years. They compulsively want back power because that's what political parties DO. They fantasize and ejaculate for power.
2. Republicans have smeared every Democrat you can name in the past 100 years. Almost all of those Democrats were white.
3. The vast majority of opposition to Obama, TPM news tidbits notwithstanding, has focused on his policies, not his race--not even the coded signals that disguise racism: his origins, his birth certificate, etc.
4. What HAS got the Republican base fired up is distrust of Democrats and their priorities, primarily spending. With one eye, Republicans conveniently overlook the dire straits of our economy; with the other, they see only TARP, stimulus, and higher taxes to pay for the uninsured. The fact that those taxes will be levied on the rich only is not important to Republicans, who seem genetically rigged to oppose any taxes.
Again, does racism play a part? Absolutely. The most egregious racism may be the willingness of some Republican leaders to propel the Birther movement and an unwillingness among the rest to denounce it.
But is it the primary reason for the knee-jerk opposition to this president? No. That has to do with the impotent lust and bankrupt values of the party itself.
September 4, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have a point Ripper but I think the point is what is propelling the hysterical, frothing at the mouth stupidity is racism. Yes, the typical M.O. of the Republicans is to throw public tantrums and bully people, etc... But I think the extra jolt of nastiness and vitriol of the tea baggers and their manic displays is unquestionably driven and propelled by racism. It isn't the only factor, but I think it nearly undeniable that it is at the heart of the demonization of Obama. Since they became the party of racism in the 60's with their southern strategy, the Republicans have become extremely adept at pushing the racist fear and hate button of ignorant whites nationwide, but especially of course in the south. There's a reason why the electoral maps of the past several Presidential elections in large part mirror slave and free states ya know.
September 4, 2009 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
oleeb, I agree that the Tea Pert Patriots are motivated, in part, by a racism most do not consciously acknowledge even to themselves. The fringe (i.e., the extreme right) of the party is running the whole funny farm.
I want to be very careful in not over-playing the race card here. It has power to shame and power to inflame. It is not a denunciation that rank-and-file Republican and independent voters will accept, because frankly, it doesn't represent their views fairly. This is why Obama would not go near the race card during the campaign.
September 4, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I want to be very careful in not over-playing the race card here."
- Well played.
September 4, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Second! While I agree with a lot of the reasons Ripper has detailed for right-wing outrage, it's so much easier for the Limbaughs and the Becks and all the other dog whistle callers in congress to attribute it to vailed (and not so vailed) racisim, like the birther movement.
September 4, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
oleeb,
There is a certain smugness to your response. However, a broader view of the sectionalism is seen in terms of religious fundamentalism (which includes the red states in the West, which didn't even exist in the time of the Civil War). See, for example, AMERICAN THEOCRACY by Kevin Phillips.
In that light, one could claim, I suppose, that it is really ignorance from where these arguments and ideas spring up. But that would lump religious beliefs with the notion of ignorance... and I'm not sure all here want to make that leap.
September 4, 2009 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't know what's smug about it but if that's what you took from it so be it.
It is indeed ignorance and lots of religion, not all, not only feeds off of but reinforces ignorance that then gets expressed in all kinds of intolerant, hateful, fearful ways.
September 4, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Smug includes things like "the party of racism since the 60's". Do you think that Condeleeza Rice and Colin Powell think so?
It also includes blanket (and misleading) statements like this:
It's true you can get away with things like this at TPM... but would you be able to convince a roomful of true centrists? I hardly think so:
Here is the Gore-Bush 2000 election on a county-by-county basis. Hardly looks free vs. slave to me. In fact, looks more like urban vs. rural - if I had to pick a meme anyway.
But if you view the world this way, you can't just broadly paint all of those disagreeing with you as racists and dismiss them. It would then require more hard thinking to think about combating their views.
September 4, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya know, sometimes you really have something to say. But other times you're just a cranky scold like in this instance. Take a hike the rest of the afternoon will ya? I could demonstrate to you how I can easily back up every word but I just don't have time for you today.
September 4, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He overdoes it sometimes, oleeb. CT, be nice.
September 4, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is your name Fermat? The margin is too small to write the proof, perhaps?
September 5, 2009 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
We're talking about the lunatic fringe, which is large enough to be dangerous and obviously has been able to scare the shit out of the more reasonable factions of the Republican Party. You say we should know our enemies for who they are. This dangerous loud and aggressive faction is racist. And someone has to speak the truth about it and repudiate it. Who is doing that? We are.
September 4, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lowly, I agree that racism should be called out. I agree we have the moral and political obligation to call it for what it is. As long as we are careful to direct the word "racist" narrowly and only to the fringe where it applies, I'm very cool with that.
September 4, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller
September 4, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
And sometimes, not so narrowly. I think all those Republicans who politically benefit from this kind of hatred, but are unwilling to call these folks out are just as culpable!
September 4, 2009 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Culpability matters.
September 4, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, they are and so is every pundit. I really don't care how loud they scream, the Right's pundits did have a part in the murder of Dr. Tiller.
September 5, 2009 1:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I feel compelled to post some of Hitler's most famous quotations. They should make us stop and think about who is saying what about who these days.
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
“How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.”
“It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge.
“All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.”
“Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future.”
“It is not truth that matters, but victory.”
“He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.”
Now on this last one, we might have a chance. Remember who overwhelmingly supported Obama? What age group?
The tactics being used by Rove and his band of evil doers are exactly what the Nazis used. Same philosophy.
September 4, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow --- just wow. I was just skimming down quickly and thought the quotes I was reading WERE from Karl Rove. Amazing.
This is why democracy works only when you have an educated (and thinking) electorate.
". . . whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that, whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them right." Thomas Jefferson
September 4, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
You write:
In 1976, Reagan said "Fascism is the basis of the New Deal".
These types of arguments have been around for a long time, applied to FDR and others.
It may be that Democrats are just as sensitive to skin color as Republicans.
I wonder how some of the discussion here looks when viewed in a similar manner to when GWB asked
"Why do they hate us?" and he answered:
It's possible that if we make this protest all about the color of the president's skin, we will miss key points as well.
Clinton was so hated by the right that he remained the whipping boy of them well into the Bush Administration.
And he was white.
September 4, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you saying there is no racist basis to some of this hysteria over health care? It is possible to sort out opposition based on ideology or politics or policies from opposition based on race.
The point here is that the opposition based on race is intolerable. Period. End of story. Unacceptable. All other opposition is inevitable and even acceptable in a democracy. But opposition based on the color of someone's skin? Let's not throw a cloak over that. Let's not pretend it's not out there and that it's not dangerous.
See the poem I posted above.
September 4, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
How much is or isn't racially based in these comparisons, I don't know. And it will be difficult to find out. Hell, how much of the female teabaggers shouts of hysteria is based on sexism? I do know, however, that I can make a very compelling case and since every other President is white, it should at least give me pause.
As an example: if teabaggers hung Obama in effigy, would you immediately claim that is an image based in lynching?
I would find it far more satisfying to label the teabaggers as traitors, much as FNC did to any who opposed the last president and point out that FNC were saying if you are against the president you are a traitor -- just like the GOP said back when.
This line of argument (the protest is based on race) allows any opposition to point out that the Democrats have stifled all protest by trying to use a race card and race baiting. And all they have to do is pull out one or two black teabaggers and there is your image that will be repeated over and over again.
The meme of "traitor" or "UnAmerican" is much more effective in my view.
How many more times does FNC have to do a number on the left before the left gets what's being done to them?
September 4, 2009 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
CT:
I agree with you. I believe that racism is exploited, but is not the root of the current hysteria. I think it is the softening of tact. There is no outrage in the media for these craven insinuations. When the left called Bush a fascist or tyrant, the noise machine came out in force to condemn the accusation. Such a defense does not exist against the right. So... What use to be implicit is now explicit. It is not race but the general poisoning of discourse that has occurred through the last two decades.
September 4, 2009 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, we have no sense of decorum and honesty has been abandoned in favor of agendas. Whatever advances teh agenda is declared regardless of its merit. There are some truths that are irrefutable, but taht are denied by nothing more significant then a bold-faced liar with a microphone. It's no wonder people cannot discern when they have crossed a line, or even whether they should have any respect for a line.
September 5, 2009 1:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, this is where FNC is really the danger. All they have to do is muddy the waters and they have "won". MSNBC is the next unfortunate step.
Now we accept commentary as news. That's very dangerous.
That's why it is so important to control the way the discussion goes. Bringing race into the mix explicitly will do progressives no favor at all.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty -- but the pig enjoys it.
September 5, 2009 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty -- but the pig enjoys it.
Perfect.
September 8, 2009 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
The white middle class has turned into the white working poor / non-working poor. Whole cities in middle America have been ravaged by unemployment and meth. Reaganism, consumer debt, and outsourcing have proven to the formerly middle class that government doesn't work.
Watch Pelosi's daughter's movie "Red America; Feeling Wronged." It's the same anger we feel, it's just directed at Democrats and the underclass. Reagan ("welfare queens") and Rove has convinced this population that the underclass is getting a better deal out of the new 1980-2009 economy.
September 4, 2009 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe I am naive, or just still too ecstatic about a historic election that just THOUROUGHLY rebuked republicans; but I honestly don't think its solely because of his skin color.
If history is any guide, it's a classic traditionalist vs. progressive struggle; and the saving grace for our country has been is the progressives typically win. Progressives were asleep when BuCheney ran, (the slackers of the Gen X generation's handiwork) but thankfully, we woke up after 8 miserable years.
Lincoln(a progressive by any name), FDR, Truman, JFK, RFK, MLK, and the Clintons (yes, the Clintons) and now Obama, they all ginned up the same amount of contempt from these types.
September 4, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't remember the birth certificate shit any other time and I submit there is something different from before at work here.
September 4, 2009 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
"During the 1880 U.S. presidential election a New York attorney, Arthur P. Hinman, was hired to explore rumors of [Chester] Arthur's foreign birth. Hinman alleged that Arthur was born in Ireland and did not come to the United States until he was fourteen years old. When that story failed to take root Hinman came forth with a new story that Arthur was born in Canada. This claim also fell on deaf ears." Wikipedia, citing Reeves, Thomas C. (1975). Gentleman Boss. NY, NY: Alfred A. Knopf
"Chester Arthur Rumor Still Lingers in Vermont,"
Boston Globe, August 17, 2009.
George Romney (Mitt's father) was born in Mexico while his parents were serving as Morman missionaries (or so they said when he was running for president -- Wikipedia says "His Mormon grandfather and his three wives fled to Mexico in 1886, but none of them ever relinquished their citizenship.")
"Celler Suggests G.O.P. Name Group to Investigate [George] Romney's Eligibility" NY Times, May 15, 1967
September 4, 2009 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
First,I have to say, that as an AA, I am thankful to bare witness to this amazing display of awareness of racism by the American collective conscious that I didn't even know was there. Just, wow.
Second, of course there is a whole added dimension of disgust that the crazies feel about this progressive President. (It was out of their realm of reasoning that America would even vote for him,so the hate machine was slowed in production--and still, look what we got. I can't bare to think what we would have had to endure from them if Hillary was the nominee.)
So again, absolutely, there's that. But I just happen to believe that racism is the most superficial layer of the the entire oozing, rotten core of the stuff.
I am incredulous that though the country came together in a most dramatic way on Nov. 5th, and there's no reason to get distracted by loons; we STILL are--everyday. I guess I will never know why all the prog blogs feel it is necessary to give us a daily dose of the lastest idiotic rant from Rush, Limbaugh, Cheney, Bachmann and Palin. But I do know this, it ain't helpin'.
It's going to keep being hard, but we simply must stay on offense more than we are on defense.
September 4, 2009 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good comment.
September 4, 2009 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
If racism is the primary driver for Republican support of anti-progressive policy, then Republican days truly are numbered. I think there's more to the story, except for some of the fringe-freaks.
We know that some TV unelected personalities try and use the racism of the fringe to incite their fans, and what's weird is that that's practically all that we hear. Where are the Republican moderates and why aren't they telling Rush and pals to STFU? Weird.
September 4, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Charles Grassley is out handing out free copies of Glenn Beck's book. Glenn fucking Beck!
September 4, 2009 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. They're looking for a scapegoat. Republicans don't hesitate in making Democrats and liberals the scapegoat and object of their ire. Obama, along with lots of other Democrats in DC fail (or refuse) to point out, truthfully I might add, that it is the Republicans and the policies of their party that have put them in the ranks of the unemployed, the poor, the bankrupt, etc... It's a big tactical and strategic error.
September 4, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Most of America already know who is responsible for the mess we are in, there are polls that show that.
September 4, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
George Washington, in the 1790's, predicted that
political parties could tear apart his new republic.
He was deeply disappointed by the divisions that arose under this presidency (namely from Hamilton and Jefferson).
What is the quote? It is like the fire that burns unchecked, that of the loyalty to the party over the nation?
And of course, having only TWO choices leads to division. This is ridiculous that we only have two.
The quickest and most effective thing you can do is Register Decline to State. Reject both parties.
Don't wait for the others to form. They may never form.
Right now. Today. Tomorrow, you can go down to the county clerks office and register Decline to State. Imagine if the majority of Americans did not declare a party. It would make the media and pundits go insane. They could no longer tell us who to vote for and how to think. We would hold our cards close to our chests. We would vote the person and not the party.
But I am sure George Washington is rolling in his grave. His prophecy is coming true. Our country is sick and falling apart and an irrational loyalty to party over country on the part of the "right wing" is the reason.
September 4, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are some interesting ideas here. Unfortunately in many states, if you decline to state a party, you lose the chance to vote in the primary.
Nevertheless, I wonder if, instead of "join a 3rd party" or "join the Green party", the meme was "don't join either party" wouldn't be a very effective form of protest. Of course, then you'd be scaring the Democrats as well... which leads us to this blog.
September 4, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
a close approximation I hope of Bill Maher:
"The Democrats are the new Republicans now and the Republicans have gone insane..."
"Parties" are nothing because, like an amoeba they are constantly shifting and changing therefore the existence of "parties" as some kind of fixed entity is impossible so it is almost oxymoronic to be a "member" of something that is constantly shifting and changing mostly just to preserve itself.
Look at all the different amalgamations of the Republican and Democrat parties through time and you see this very very well. At one time, the "Republican" party was more like the "Democrat" party is now and vice versa.
Parties in America don't exist!!
September 4, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I agree that racism is at the root of much of the opposition to President Obama, I really believe that most of the people who are teabaggers, or supporters of Ms. Palin, or birthers, or the parents who want to pull their children out of school to avoid the President's message are completely unaware of their deep-seated racism.
They will vehemently deny that skin color has anything to do with their disagreements with the President. They will point out the number of black friends they have, or the diversity of their neighborhood.
They are in denial, but telling them they are racists will not solve the problem. Their prejudice is so deeply buried that it won't surface no matter how many layers get peeled off. The buried racism finds an outlet in opposing health care reform, demanding a birth certificate, likening the President to Hitler. For these people, the position they take is perfectly rational, and they will probably never realize the true source of their anger.
September 4, 2009 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do we explain these images in terms of racism then?
September 4, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Jewish man, who is also a war veteran, and whose great grandparents and most of my family were killed in either the pograms in Russia or the death camps in Belzec, I find any abuse of the image of Hitler and the Nazis offensive. I don't see your point. You sound like an apologist. Are you saying that because one leader was vilified (Bush) it's ok to vilify another, not because of what he has done, but because of his race. Racism is evil, no matter where it comes from. This is not a game.
September 4, 2009 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Jewish man, who is also a war veteran, and whose great grandparents and most of my family were killed in either the pograms in Russia or the death camps in Belzec, I find any abuse of the image of Hitler and the Nazis offensive. I don't see your point. You sound like an apologist. Are you saying that because one leader was vilified (Bush) it's ok to vilify another, not because of what he has done, but because of his race. Racism is evil, no matter where it comes from. This is not a game.
September 4, 2009 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
The point is very simple:
There is no way to convincingly prove that making Obama out to be Hitler has anything to do with racism. Indeed, it's possible to say that the left started this type of iconography on the presidency!
Here's another set of photos.
Imagine if Obama were portrayed as a chimp. Racism? Or dislike of the president?
If Obama is hung in effigy will that be a racist image like a lynching? Or will it be seen similarly to when Bush was hung in effigy?
The point is that it is impossible to convincingly attribute ascribing motives to racism unless that is already what you believe they are. Therefore, they should be non-starters for the left. Better they should push back using patriotism, respect for institutions, and other tactics that have already been championed by the right.
September 4, 2009 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are EXACTLY RIGHT, clearthinker. Thank you. I don't understand why they can't see this? I'm definitely not a Bushie but for God's sake, how about some equality here.
September 4, 2009 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no convincing anyone who will not be convinced.
September 4, 2009 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
That works both ways. The racist tag won't stick and will come back to bite the left. They ignore this point when there are more effective ways of controlling the dialog.
But I've yet to convince you of that.
September 4, 2009 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know if we can blame everything that is happening on racism, but it is certainly a factor for some.
I have 3 members of my extended family (father, uncle, brother-in-law) who in all other parts of their lives are normal, everyday great guys that you'd love to have as neighbors. But ever since Obama came on the scene, my father and uncle have reverted to the blatant racists they were when I was a child, that I THOUGHT they had gotten over, and the brother in law I never knew was a racist showed his true colors. President Obama could cure world hunger, do away with every social program that ever existed, end all the wars, over turn Roe v Wade, reinstate school prayer, and put a copy of the 10 Commandments carved in stone at every federal building in the country and they would still hate him because it is his intent to put the n*****s in charge of everything...No kidding.
They can't be the only ones...
September 4, 2009 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe you. Right down to the "normal, everyday guy" part. As HopefulPatriot mentioned above, racism runs deep.
How to combat it in that subtle form? You can't. Short of rewiring people's brains, you wait for it to burn itself out. It will happen - it *is* happening. Gender issues will burn themselves out next. And if you talk to people younger than 25 or so, you will find a remarkable blaseness about sexual orientation.
That's progress. Real progress.
My points are how to deal with the irrational hatred of Obama. And the best way, in my view, is to treat it as if it were based in the same thing as the irrational hatred of Clinton. You simply take away the power of the race issue by discussing the president, not as a black man, but as the Institution of the Presidency -- something that people who listen to FNC are mighty big on.
If someone then claims that Obama isn't the legitimate president, then a simple statement of "stop being a child" will not only stun, but suffice. I've used this technique many times. It immediately tends to turn the conversation around as well.
The problem that those on the left have is that they want everyone to wake up free of all the prejudices they spent a lifetime accumulating. As you can see, that will never happen. The best we can do is to ensure that those prejudices are kept out of the national debate and are shamed if brought out. Attacking people for being anti-patriotic and disrespectful of the office of the Presidency will go a long way to helping ensure some sort of government stability.
The left, unfortunately, also is quite cynical about the same institutions -- as you can read on these boards.
The end game will be that no one trusts the government at all. And if that is taken to it's logical conclusion, you will no longer see America as a nation of law.
The left likes to think it is very smart. To get drawn into this issue framed as a racial one is a loser for sure -- and continue to allow the right to control the conversation.
Let's see how smart the left really is.
September 5, 2009 1:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just responded to my uncle's latest e-mail (the one about HR1388) by simply sending him the link to factcheck.org where they debunk it, along with the suggestion that he stop acting like a child...we'll see.
September 5, 2009 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I believe Bush was called Hitler in Europe and ex-USSR to be sure. That huge poster you see hanging of him as Hitler was in France, not USA.
If people say Americans called Bush Hitler, please get in their faces and say no they did not and if two or three nuts did, that's why they have mental health care.
Party leader Boss Limbaugh has had whole shows comparing Obama to Hitler and *NO ONE* has called him on it. It is a false equivalency, very false.
September 4, 2009 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
C'mon, OT:
Read this. It's from 2005.
So there you have it. AMERICAN politicians using the H-word... going back to... the 1960s!
And we haven't even gotten to Clinton and Bush.
Only "nuts" make the comparison? Well, sure! Isn't that what we call the teabaggers?
You can't have it both ways, OT.
And people at TPM are *still* calling the GOP a fascist party!
September 5, 2009 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you remember that during the campaign that the term elitist was used constantly as a type of eptithet to describe Obama. Elitist is the very same thing as uppity N-----. It was appalling then and it is appalling now.
How long does the Civil War have to be over before this country can move on?
Northeasterners are hated and ridiculed as well. I suppose the term carpetbagger will become prevalent again. (Stupid crackers!)
Oh and the outrage over a black man speaking directly to our children. Not the children!
You are so right - heads are spinning because we have a black president, but not only a black president, but one with an African father. And he lived in Indonesia, a Muslim country. Oh my! The racism, when Obama was in Russia, was blatant; here it is painted with the soft brush of a politically correct vocabulary, but ignorant bigotry is the same in any language and in any culture.
September 4, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Elitism also was applied regularly to Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry ... need I say more?
September 4, 2009 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are in denial.
September 4, 2009 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
He overdoes it sometimes, LowlyWorm. Ripper, be nice.
September 4, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
The elitism is part and parcel of the assault on education, and it also speaks to the resentment of the liberal Left, which has it's strength in the northeast. Afterall, industry came to the northeast and with its abuses came organized labor. When industry finally made its way south, it was tempered by the unions so it's practices did not warrant organization. Give them time. As unions diminish, they will return to their former ways, it is inevitable in a profit driven environment to use and replace labor, not nurture and develop labor.
September 5, 2009 1:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
"They want back that country that always had white Presidents. The idea of "one of them" being the leader, the senior, the Commander in Chief, Number 1, is unbearable."
Would someone please enlighten me as to why the fact that Barack Obama is bi-racial is never mentioned. He is as much "one of us" as he is "one of them".
Oh and just for your edification, his blackness is not the problem. http://thereluctantconspiracytheorist.blogspot.com/2009/09/its-not-about-his-blackness-people.html
It is his politics and the politics of the corrupt people he chooses to surround himself with. I thought with Bush out, there would be a New Dawn, an administration without corruption. Nope, same s**t, different day.
September 4, 2009 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Oh and just for your edification, his blackness is not the problem."
That's one arrogant-ass way to say "I disagree." I read your blog, and the "logic" runs like this:
Charles Rangle is one who made the charge that abuse of Obama is based on racism.
But Charles Rangle has cheated on taxes more than once.
Therefore, abuse of Obama is not based on racism.
They have courses in logic, you know.
September 4, 2009 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I'm sorry Overreach, from reading your postings, I thought you would appreciate an "arrogant-ass" post from someone other than yourself. Your response made no sense, so let me lay it out for you.
Charles RanGEL was not the only one listed in my blog. He is an example of a corrupt politician, that I'm sure even you would agree. The other corrupt individuals listed were Timothy Geithner, Nancy Killefer, Tom Daschle, Ron Kirk, and Hilda Solis. All people who couldn't manage to get their taxes right. Do you want these kind of people helping to lead the country? Would you surround yourself with corruptness? Is it OK with you if I don't agree with this? Does any of this have anything to do with race? Where is YOUR logic?
Frankly, his race was the ONLY reason I WOULD have voted for him. And since he got elected by a good margin, apparently the majority did not have a problem with his race. It's the left-fringers who keep dragging this up.
September 5, 2009 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see what the corrupTION of any of these people has to do with Obama or the birthers. You seem to think it does, and I can't imagine how.
Thank heavens the gun-toting, bigoted loons are the minority as you say.
September 5, 2009 2:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
My two cents on this topic.
The fundamental base of racism (sexism, etc) is not hatred, it is that the individual does perceive a share identity. They are "one of those." For most of the time, one can exist side by side with "them," but in the end "they have their way of doing things and we have ours." It is in times of confict and crisis that this lack of shared identity (commonly known as a nation, or in other parlance, tribe or community) can lead to violent confrontations and overt discrimination.
For many people in this country, in their day to day lives, they did not have to make a decision in which race was an issue. It was easy to convince oneself that "I'm not racist," since one wasn't turning firehoses on African Americans or sending the calvary in on a Native American village.
Obama has changed this. Now, one of those people who I okay living next to, who I didn't want to kill but wouldn't want one of my siblings to marry is actually in control of the White House, actually represents the country as its figure head.
And that changes everything. There was an uptick in the militias when Clinton was elected. But there has been an added intensity with Obama according to those that track these groups, like the Southern Poverty Law Center.
As much as people in the country want to believe that we in this country are a nation, we are really many nations held in check by our alligience to a political state.
September 5, 2009 12:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
It doesn't help either that they are made to think that he wants to change everything in their life. Keep in mind that there are people who believe all the trash coming from Fox and right wing radio. If it was just that he was black it might be one thing but they are told that he is going to destroy everything every day.
September 5, 2009 12:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Surely you aren't saying that Bill Clinton was treated easier by FNC? They kept calling him a "murderer". Or have you forgotten?
I think that this is as hysterical as anything.
Can't claim that accusing the sitting president of murder is racist or sexist based here? Can you?
September 5, 2009 1:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amen. This is entirely about racism. I hate these bigots. I've become a bigot myself---if anyone reveals themselves to be one of these asshats I immediately hate them. I hate the right, I hate conservatives, I hate the GOP. God help me.
September 5, 2009 3:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
At least to the birthers and deathers, I think we need to be up and in their faces with this.
Birther: I just can't figure out why he wouldn't produce a birth certificate.
Us: Oh get out, but that's only bigotry. He's proven his birth long ago obviously, but you and people like you can't bear the idea of the President being black. That's all this is.
Birther: Blah-blah.
Us: You don't realize how transparent you are. Everybody can see the bigotry in you. And you have no shame.
September 5, 2009 4:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree...it is racism at at its base.
They put lipstick on a pig to make it look better but it is still a pig.
September 5, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink