Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
May 23, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

22 Killed in Manchester, U.K., in What Police Are Treating as a Terrorist Bombing

Czeslaw Milosz: A Life

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Email this item Print this item

Blame It on the Media

Posted on Apr 15, 2008
Barack Obama
AP photo / Charlie Neibergall

By Stanley Kutler

It was inevitable for Barack Obama to beat a retreat from his recent remarks about his difficulty in reaching Pennsylvania’s working-class voters. The railroad, coal and steel jobs that once fueled the Pennsylvania economy have declined dramatically for several decades. Obama noted that the frustrations and anger of working-class families determined and dominated their voting beliefs. “It’s not surprising, then,” he said, “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Our intrepid media, always anxious to find mountains where molehills exist, declared a state of war, signaling Hillary Clinton to do her thing. The cable networks, particularly MSNBC, which barring a weather calamity or a missing child, seems to report politics to the exclusion of everything else, were in battle mode, anxious for what some called a “full-blown political disaster.” And they certainly tried for one. Clinton predictably blasted Obama, saying she was “taken aback” by his “demeaning remarks,” which, she told Indianapolis plant workers, were “elitist and out of touch.” This from Wellesley’s and the Yale Law School’s finest. With a $100 million-plus income.

And so the Obama retreat: “If I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that,” Obama said in an interview later as the story flamed, threatening to ignite our cable lines. “I didn’t say it as well as I should have,” the senator remarked. At first, it had appeared he would not back off. That same morning he told a Muncie, Ind., town hall meeting his remarks could have been better phrased, but he maintained they were what “everybody knows is true.” He amplified his earlier remarks, saying that “what is absolutely true is that people don’t feel like they are being listened to.” Still, he succumbed and we received his sort-of-apology.

Clinton eagerly grasped another straw in the battle for the superdelegates she hoped would rescue her candidacy. No more sniper fire for her as she sent up a fusillade: “People don’t need a president who looks down on them,” she said. “They need a president who stands up for them.” Now, perhaps she had gained some control over her campaign. When Bill Clinton was asked that day at a rally in North Carolina about Obama’s remarks, the former president passively (or passively aggressively?) replied, “I agree with what Hillary said.” We shouldn’t parse that too much.

The sound and fury of course signifies nothing—other than the media’s innate desire to create a story and demean the political discourse they supposedly are to report. Within the confines of a private exchange between the two, Obama’s remarks undoubtedly would have had Clinton head-nodding in agreement. Obama offered a clever—but hardly original—insight into the psychology of folks depressed for decades or forced to live on the margin. The only story in this affair is one the media concocted, their self-fulfilling “full-blown political disaster,” and one neatly made to order for Clinton. Thus another media happening, created and nurtured by a media anxious for bigger coverage, even when it amounts to peanuts.


Square, Site wide
The media are the self-appointed arbiters of our political discourse. By their rules, candor is wholly unwelcome. They cannot or will not abide complexity. And thus, the sound bite is the story.

No media account provided any discussion whatsoever to weigh the possibility of a more thoughtful consideration of Obama’s remarks. Could he have had a useful insight? None of our talking heads, our “strategists” and “pundits,” probed Obama’s meaning, his motivation—or, heaven forbid, the possibility he might have been right. Instead, the media cavalierly dismissed his remarks as offensive and demeaning—and worst of all, tarred them with the brush of elitism. Obama provided cannon fodder to sustain the media’s reason for their self-defined existence. They believe their mission is to find drama, conflict and controversy—but hey!—what about understanding?

By the new week, MSNBC was talking about “journalistic standards” and Dr. Phil. And then Obama characterized Clinton as “Annie Oakley,” following her revelation (what did we know all these years?) that she learned to shoot a gun as a child. Where will that go? Somewhere, you can be sure. In the meantime, why aren’t we discussing the administration’s torture policy—or its proposed status-of-forces agreement with Iraq? Or are such stories too complex? The media are killing us.

Stanley Kutler is the author of “The Wars of Watergate.”

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By cann4ing, April 19, 2008 at 6:09 pm Link to this comment

Viable, cost effective alternative to oil.  Try wind, solar, geothermal and go pick up a DVD of “Who killed the electric car?”

Report this

By Marshall, April 19, 2008 at 1:19 pm Link to this comment

Of course that’s preposterous since Obama has tons of corporate money behind him, as do the Democrats in general.

What’s tragic is that you all take for granted that middle America is “voting against their own economic interests”.  Putting a Democrat in office, assuming they stick to the tried and true formula of more invasive economic govt. intervention (which I have every reason to believe they will), will only hurt middle America in the end.  Entitlements, bailouts, social programs, and the taxes they raise to fund them are not what is needed.  But Democrats are traditionally clueless about this because they subscribe to a populist (within their own base) agenda.  Luckily, America… and Middle America (whoever they are) has seen through this over the last two Presidential election cycles.

Report this

By magouche, April 19, 2008 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment

To madmax:

Precisely, this is not something corporate America wants in the headlines.  That is why it is tragic, that a fellow democrat, HRC, is the one who opposes Obama’s comments the loudest.  Makes you wonder, or makes it clear, where she stands in the matter.

Report this

By Marshall, April 18, 2008 at 9:33 pm Link to this comment

Yes, I should have said “the poor pay no income tax”.

I think you’ve confused some disparate concepts and rendered your own personal assessment of our economy that doesn’t jibe with generally accepted economic principles.

GDP measures economic output and is the benchmark for comparison between the economies of different countries.  Assigning perceived socio-economic weights to arbitrary categories of transactions is a value judgment that has no basis in economic reality.  The variables would be so complex and mutable as to be useless, would be impossible to measure, would fail to consider future advancement, and would simply reflect the judgment of the valuator rather than any subjective yardstick of economic performance.  Some of the variables your “GPI” wants to consider (like crime rates, divorce rates) are fine as standalone statistics to be considered for policy, research, or commercially in the private sector, but have no place in the measure of economic performance.

Since there is no generally accepted value of “GPI”, and since military spending is gaged as a percentage of GDP, your article doesn’t contribute to your point at all.  BTW: how does your “GPI” value defense spending?  As a blanket liability?  Does it include the economic value of defense spending domestically and abroad?  Its protective economic value to trade?  It’s educational and technological benefits?  The article is curiously silent on this subject, but the same complexities exists when trying to value the other categories it does present.

Simon Kuznets, who didn’t support anything like your “GPI”, contributed research to the GNP but was not “the inventor”.  GNP is also different from GDP, so I’m not sure why you’d even use him as a reference.

As to wages: Workers should be paid according to their value to the economy, not according to the government’s judgement of what they need to live some predetermined lifestyle.  This is why the minimum wage issue was nothing but a populist bid.  And if this “help” to the poor actually benefited business as you say, they’d already be doing it.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 17, 2008 at 10:33 pm Link to this comment

Your assertion that the poor “pay no taxes” is a stretch of the facts.  How do you imagine that the poor get around paying, sales tax, motor vehicle tax, real estate taxes and other more hidden taxes.  This is an old lie, EVERYONE pays taxes in one way or another.  Have you ever considered the fact that if workers were paid realistic wages they would have no need for subsidies.  Business CAN afford to pay them, and in a round about way, this “help” to the poor actually gives BUSINESSES cheap labor.  They then deflect the blame to laborers as the recipients of “free money” while their coffers burst with profit. 

Also your comment regarding the GDP is skewed. The GDP isn’t an accurate measurement of anything, let alone the “small percent” you claim military expenditures are of it.  This article has a better explanation of WHY GDP isn’t much of a measure of our economic viability and why, with only a cursory glance, the percent you cite would actually be MUCH higher.

Wikipedia quote:

“Simon Kuznets the inventor of the GDP, in his very first report to the US Congress in 1934 said:
...the welfare of a nation [can] scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income…”

Report this

By madmax, April 17, 2008 at 8:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s not in the MSM’s interest to have discussions on the issues. The isssue that Obama brought up in SF has been discussed and written about by credible researchers, why is middle America voting against their own economic interest. If this were discussed rationally, and the pattern changed corporate interest could lose some of their hold on government. Hence the all out attack on issues.

Report this

By Louise, April 17, 2008 at 7:21 pm Link to this comment

I have a neighbor who had to wait three weeks with a broken ankle until her HMO approved allowing her to see a doctor she didn’t have to drive forty-five miles to get to. Of course they had to re-break the ankle. And I’m not making this up!

The emergency room in the Hospital down the street refused to set it, unless she could pay in advance, because they didn’t do business with her company’s HMO. And of course she couldn’t.

It’s not easy coming up with a few hundred extra dollars in an emergency. Especially when more than $250.00 is being held out of your paycheck every month to make sure you have that emergency care when you need it!

So PUUULEEEZE don’t tell me about how horrible it is in England. You plain don’t know! And you plainly don’t know how horrible it is HERE!

At least had this happened in England or Canada, she wouldn’t have been denied emergency treatment because she didn’t have the cash!

And getting that ankle set would not have cost her ONE SINGLE PENNY!

You don’t like socialism? How about Fascism? You OK with that? And, I defy you to show me one line in the Constitution that say’s protecting Capitilism and corporate greed is more important than protecting the rights of the people!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 17, 2008 at 6:43 pm Link to this comment

I mean we spend 600 billion per year, more than all the nations of the planet combined.

I think its time to spend those monies on something besides the military and more importantly the American military industry which can make 2 billion dollar planes but has a hard time building a car that can get 40 mpg.

Report this

By Marshall, April 17, 2008 at 4:41 pm Link to this comment

If you’ve got a viable, cost-effective alternative to oil then I’m all for it.

I don’t know what you mean by gutting the Military.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 17, 2008 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

We need to “gut” the MIC.  Hopefully in the next presidency.

We need to rebuild this nations infrastructure and find an alternative to oil before we build another tank or B-2.

Report this

By tdbach, April 17, 2008 at 6:03 am Link to this comment

I suggest you read Marie Cocco’s column here at TD. “Cerebral” is indeed a problem, when it drifts into condescension, as Obama did in SF. He may be the darling of white-collar liberals, but to one segment of our society at least he’s an old story in a new cover, and statements like this only add to their suspicions and distrust.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 17, 2008 at 5:44 am Link to this comment

Yes, we saw classic entitlement of the poor in action, always taking advantage as they do, in New Orlens, expecting others to pay for their personal problems.

Report this

By NewPatriot4Reason, April 16, 2008 at 11:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

jackpine savage—thanks for reading, I appreciate your comments.

Report this

By Marshall, April 16, 2008 at 10:36 pm Link to this comment

By felicity, April 15 at 1:41 pm #
(267 comments total)

“Our government, which now directs about 50 percent of our/its discretionary budget to the extensive military-industrial complex”

That’s true, but military spending is typically measured as a percentage of GDP, not of discretionary spending.  By that measure, it’s current 3.5% isn’t historically large.

“Ironically, it’s more often than not those who have benefitted from government largesse in the first place who resent having to come up with the taxes to guarantee that their government contracts keep coming, that their subsidies remain in place.”

I assume you’re talking about the poor here since they benefit the most from government largess in the form of entitlements despite paying no taxes.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 16, 2008 at 9:08 pm Link to this comment

Very clearly, the gambler analogy seems to be quite accurate and on the money.

Reminiscing about the good old days and Dennis Kucinich, glad he won his election to Congress.  I still maintain our candidates are selected for us by the powerful and elite. Of course my point is shot in the foot, because Kucinich is back in Congress?

Go figure.

Report this

By Stuart, April 16, 2008 at 8:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How much longer will the Democratic Party Leadership stand idle by,watching ” this phony,ridiculous woman back stabbing Barack Obama in bright daylight “,
before they stop this silly,disgusting person and throw her out the window and under the Bus ? Can`t they not see that this nasty person is not the obvious choice,but a product of,and supported by,the jewish masterminded elitist establishment…..
something that has been the root of this county problem for years ? And because of that,why can`t
anyone see that Barack Obama is the only apparent,
true choice for this country to make needed changes ?

Report this

By cann4ing, April 16, 2008 at 8:32 pm Link to this comment

Hillary Clinton is like the gambler who can’t walk away from the table after losing big.  The thought is that if she just hangs in their longer, she will somehow come out ahead.  But just as the odds are with the House so that the gambler only gets in over her head, it appears Hillary and her supporters, many of those posting here, are simply unwilling to fact the mathematical realities:  To catch, let alone pass, Obama in either pledged delegates or popular vote, she would need to win 60% in every remaining state—something she only did in Arkansas.  And the fact is that while she is leading in PA, she is losing and will lose in NC.  (She can’t catch Obama in number of states won no matter how she fairs).

Obama was not my first choice.  I think Dennis Kucinich would have been far superior to either of the remaining candidates.  But the math is the math, and nothing any of you or Hillary says between now and the convention is going to change that.

It is time for Hillary supporters to start showing a little political maturity, for a John McCain presidency portends to unmitigated disaster including a potential nuclear strike on Iran and an economic collapse that would make the Great Depression seem like the good old days.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 6:11 pm Link to this comment

Haven’t they john polifronio? Staggering. Amazing just how much inaccurate information so many posters here at TD have. The live in a constant state of denial.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 6:04 pm Link to this comment

Yes, Bay Area Voter, you are absolutely right regarding the MSM. I have seen those very same reports trgarding how skewed the reporting has been on Obama and Hillary.

Picture wise Kerry hunting in Ohio was my personal fave though. Pheasant, wasn’t it?

And yep, its all about the Electoral College.

Great post.

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 16, 2008 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment

Excellent post…well written.  And thank you for dedicating 20 years of your life to the comfort and safety of your fellow citizens.

Report this

By mofolo, April 16, 2008 at 5:09 pm Link to this comment

one thing long waits - worse than our emergency room waits. 

Any articles I read on Socialized meds say this.

A friend of my in UK thought her mother was not reactiing well to her new meds.  She called the doctor office for an appointment.  She was told she had to wait till Thursday, this was on a Nonday, to call in to make an appointment. 

Secondly I do not like Socialism as a form of government.  Unfortunately, our politicians don’t believe in the Constitution.  Sad.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 3:19 pm Link to this comment

“Propaganda to me, facts to you Bert. “

There are established standards for each of these.

From Wikipedia;

PROPAGANDA is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.
– Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O’Donnell, Propaganda And Persuasion

Instead of impartially providing INFORMATION (or facts) propaganda in its most basic sense presents information in order to influence its audience. The desired result is a change of the cognitive narrative of the subject in the target audience.

Below are a number of techniques for generating propaganda:

Ad Hominem: A Latin phrase which has come to mean attacking your opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.

Appeal to authority: Appeals to authority cite prominent figures to support a position, idea, argument, or course of action.

Appeal to fear: Appeals to fear seek to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population.

Appeal to Prejudice: Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition.

Argumentum ad nauseam: This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach works best when media sources are limited and controlled by the propagator.

Bandwagon: Bandwagon and “inevitable-victory” appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to join in and take the course of action that “everyone else is taking.”

Inevitable victory: invites those not already on the bandwagon to join those already on the road to certain victory. Those already or at least partially on the bandwagon are reassured that staying aboard is their best course of action.

Join the crowd: This technique reinforces people’s natural desire to be on the winning side. This technique is used to convince the audience that a program is an expression of an irresistible mass movement and that it is in their best interest to join.

Wikipedia goes on to list many, many more examples of propaganda. But I stopped here for a reason. The last three types of propaganda I list – Bandwagon, Inevitable Victory, and Join the Crowd -  are a VERY favorite method of using propaganda by a certain well known candidate for president and his most ardent supports on TD and in the media.


A FACT is defined as something that is the case, something that actually exists, or SOMETHING THAT CAN BE VERIFIED according to an established standard of evaluation.

I use a lot of facts in my posts, which you tend not to like. But if I read a post that makes an egregious error on fact, I seldom let that pass. And I can verify the facts I post.

And to try and pass off opionion as fact is even worse in my book. I have lots of opinions. But I know they are not fact and therefore others can disagree. And I don’t try to force people to accept my opinion. I just put the facts out there and let the chips fall where they may.

I try not to knowingly engage in propaganda. If someone intreperts my facts and opinion as propaganda that is their personal internal thinking and intrepretation of what I write. Again I have no control over that. But facts are facts and opinion is opinion according to establihed standards in society.

If people are going to engage in discussion then I believe they should know the difference berween fact and opinion and not try and pass one off as the other nor confuse one for the other.

For instancePepsi-Cola has no sugar in it. Factually that is not true and I can prove if with verifiable facts.

Pepsi-Cola is the best soda pop in the world. Opinion.

Hillary should drop out of the race because she cannot win. See bandwagon form of propaganda above.

Report this

By magouche, April 16, 2008 at 3:10 pm Link to this comment

“Cerebral” and “Intelligent” have become “elitist” terms in this “a C average is good enough to become president” climate. 

Obama being cerebral and intelligent give me hope that in the Obama White House, finally, no child will be left behind and that adequate attention will be given to revamp our educational institutions and that they will be funded adequately. 

I have been bitter for the past 7 year as well and Obama spoke the truth when he made his remarks last week Sunday,  which should have included people like me, way over 50, female, white, middle class.

Ms. Clinton, who has been so desperate from the first moment a primary win was “stolen” from her, has been more than bitter, AND meanspirited, underhanded, untruthful, and petty. it has completely changed my opinion of both Clintons to disgust from what used to be admiration.

Ms. Clinton has apparently forgotten her remarks in 1995: and will certainly claim she MISSPOKE, should they be brought up again:

“In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach.

“Screw ‘em,” she told her husband. “You don’t owe them a thing, Bill. They’re doing nothing for you; you don’t have to do anything for them.”

( Benjamin Barber witnessed and wrote about in his book, “The Truth of Power: Intellectual Affairs in the Clinton White House” )

Thanks for your wonderful post!

Report this

By paulocurry, April 16, 2008 at 2:40 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hillary has come to San Fransisco so many times to raise big time cash from ELITISTS !  Could she please give us a report on what she said??  As for the heroic Bomb McCain .. he recently had a “town hall” meeting at a COUNTRY CLUB outside Philly!!  At least Obama has the courage of his convictions and refuses to get down in the slime with his TWO opponents.  Was it not the eloquent Carville who described Pennsylvania as Philladelphia and Pittsburg with MISSISIPPI in the middle? And quickly slimed Gov Richardson for supporting Obama on Hillary’s behalf !  Go back in the SWAMP with your nasty Mary Matlin!!

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment

Looks like I am replying to myself, but I am actually replying to your post below. TD’s reply system leaves a but to be desired. Nevertheless…...

Can you explain a a bit more how you do handler it when you say, “.....but seems I handle it differently than you.”

Also, if you are not running for the W.H. why do you support any candidate? Jyst to be in the debate? Just to try and change public discourse? 

What is your purpose? I truly do not understand how you ‘handle’ it and am curious.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 2:08 pm Link to this comment

I agree with Expat. Another great post tdbach.  smile

Report this

By Aegrus, April 16, 2008 at 2:02 pm Link to this comment

Won’t happen.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment

When the voters elect John McCain next November do ‘ya think that will be “a bit perhaps too cerebral” on the part of Amerucans?

Report this

By Aegrus, April 16, 2008 at 1:06 pm Link to this comment

Agony can also be a precedent seeing how well Barack Obama is doing under such a campaign. If he is stuck down, will a more powerful and talented leader take his place? I’d like to think so.

Report this

By cyrena, April 16, 2008 at 12:55 pm Link to this comment

Great post cognitorex..

Just thought I’d mention that while Barack and Michelle must go through this agony, they are NOT alone. I could through it too, for all of the same reasons. And, that’s probably the point.

So, if they’re in a win-win situation, (and I’d like to believe that myself) then it means that the rest of us are as well.

But yeah…it’s agony.

Report this

By cyrena, April 16, 2008 at 12:48 pm Link to this comment

Just out of curiosity mofolo, what has universal health care ‘done’ to Canada and England? The patients like it, the doctors like it, and so I’m just curious about what it has ‘done’ to them, since you say that you don’t like it.

Report this

By tdbach, April 16, 2008 at 12:44 pm Link to this comment

No, those aren’t “the facts on the ground.” There is substantial difference between the parties on economic issues. Repubs want to dismantle the New Deal. Dems are trying to preserve and expand (Universal Healthcare) it - even the DLC. This DLC=GOP meme is what’s tearing the Democratic party apart.

You’re right that movement conservatives have played on racial antipaphy, and southern resentment over the humiliation that came civil rights victories, to garner support, but if they didn’t offer immediate gratification of a fatter net paycheck (albeit an abysmal improvement compared to the windfall enjoyed by the wealthy), they woudn’t hold onto them for more than one election cycle, let alone 30 years.

The fact is, my brother and my neighbors have been cutting off their nose despite their face and voting Republican because they’ve bought the meme that less government is better government, and they’re not angry or southern or racist or remotely poor.

Face it: tax cuts are an easy sell. Tax hikes in the name of progressive ambitions are not. And if you really really want to piss off the people who have bought the tax-cut message, don’t tell them they did it because they’d rather have the money in their pocket than in the treasury, tell them they did it because they’re ignorant gun-toting, god-fearing, bigots.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 16, 2008 at 12:44 pm Link to this comment

Your full of it bert.

If I didn’t know better, I would suspect Hillary’s campaign of employing you to post good about her, bad about Obama 24/7, except she doesn’t have any money to pay you, in fact she has to rely on overblown sensationalist claims against Obama to get free press.

Report this

By john polifronio, April 16, 2008 at 12:11 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You have certainly been sold a ton of nonsense about Obama.  Obama has lied about every substantive issue he’s had to confront.  The BS coming out of Obama is staggering.  There is fast growing body of revelations all over the internet, about the way in which this false Messiah has hoodwinked the public.

Report this

By BayAreaVoter, April 16, 2008 at 10:53 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The cable news networks and msm have been completely unfair to Sen Clinton during this entire campaign season. The studies show that in the last quarter 85% of the stories about Hillary were negative; far more than Obama’s stories (that has changed with Rev Wright and bitter)

So, now the media is pouncing on something Obama said and you’re all upset? Oh, boo hoo.

Obama appeals to the elite on the coasts and in Jackson Hole but if we want to win the election why not nominate the woman who can do it? Remember Dukakis in the tank; Gore rolling his eyes; Kerry windsurfing? They were all infinitely better than their opponents but it doesn’t matter. The electoral college matters. If Obama is the nominee say hello to Pres McCranky.

Report this

By Jasonik, April 16, 2008 at 10:11 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Barak Obama’s recent controversial statement at a fundraiser in San Francisco was merely a shorthand paraphrase of an analysis he has likely presented on many occasions.

He expressed the exact sentiment (more completely and artfully) on the Charlie Rose Show in 2004. (Video 1:45)

Report this

By mofolo, April 16, 2008 at 8:53 am Link to this comment

It is a shame that Hillary is so bent on becoming the Democratic nominee that she is willing to destroy it with untruths and character assasination.  If she disagrees in what Obama has to say about the “bitter” Americans then she should tell her beliefs about the American Public. Calling him names is childish, which is the way she is running her campaign.  He may have worded it wrong but he is right.  I am disgruntled with the way things have been going these past 30 years or more. I don’t agree with his insurance plans because I believe it is to Socialistic and I have seen what it has done to England and Canada. I don’t think he is elitist and I don’t agree with him on everything.

Report this

By cognitorex, April 16, 2008 at 8:53 am Link to this comment

Obama has embarked on a profound sociological and political gamble. He gambles by offering the electorate a deep respect by quietly and firmly telling truths. His campaign, to a degree unparalleled in normal campaigning, constantly and repetitively gambles that voters of all stripes, indeed, can handle the truth. It must be at times agony to watch the ‘gotcha’ spin from opponents and the press while waiting to see if the American citizenry can make intelligent decisions faced with a cacophony of spin.

So far the voters have proved Obama’s respect for them to be well placed. They have showed their common sense by ignoring mindless spin battles and continuing to vote increases in Obama’s winning lead primary numbers.

Hillary has made herself into the politician’s worst nightmare, a caricature of the pandering politician. This week I am against trade deals says she as she enters a post-industrial state. This week I am a bird hunter she advertises. Last week I was a policy wonk and before that Mrs. Experience and whoops I find myself in rural hinterlands so fetch me a shot and a beer.

Obama was thoughtful, honest and a bit perhaps too cerebral last week. He was thoughtful, honest and trusting of the electorate and a bit perhaps too cerebral the week before. He said his white Gramma distrusted black people and that she said bigoted things, which was honest, thoughtful, respectful of his listener’s intelligence and a bit too cerebral the week before that. Pennsylvania’s rural voters in the majority accept that there is bitterness and a penchant to be angry over race, guns and religion but Barack’s delivery would have been better couched in more palatable down to earth terms.

It must be agony for Barack and Michelle to watch and listen to twaddle gossip cast as news, waiting and waiting to see if common folks respond with common sense to not particularly revelatory truisms, that widespread unemployment encourages bitterness and that racism at varying levels is part of America’s culture.
I’d like to think that the Obama family is actually in a “win-win” situation. They will continue to rise above pandering political showmanship and tell truths, although perhaps in a voice a bit too cerebral. They will ask and tell the electorate that their understanding is required to define and tackle America’s open sore problems in health care, job creation, a dollar driven Washington culture and the USA’s international posture. If Americans in a majority can actually “handle the truth” we/they will stand with the Obamas when they inherit the White House and begin a brutal slog to “change.” If, on the other hand, voters revert to distraction over race, religion, sexuality and Annie Oakley panderings then Barack’s quest for truthful definitions to guide America will be seen as a bridge too far of an endeavor; a bit perhaps too cerebral.

Report this

By geoffspear, April 16, 2008 at 8:44 am Link to this comment

“Like everyone else, they are motivated foremost by pocketbook issues that affect the fortunes of their families.”

Only if they’re operating on the assumption that their families are guaranteed that they’re about to win the lottery and they really need taxes to be lowered on people making $50 million in a year.  Granted, the “American Dream” delusion may play a part here; poor people really will support lower taxes on the rich because they’ve been brainwashed into thinking that they too can become rich at a moment’s notice.

Report this

By Mark Lamb, April 16, 2008 at 8:41 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Calling some one an elitist is name calling.  If she disagrees with what he says then give her view point.  But all she is doing is distroying the party with lies and name calling.  She needs to stick to the issues and her viewpoints.

Report this

By wordsonfire, April 16, 2008 at 8:37 am Link to this comment

That white voters can’t handle the truth . . . that is the case on the merits . . .that because there is little or no differentian between economic issues from either party for the past 20 years. . . with the DLC supporting the “end of welfare as we know it,” that the only issues that voters have had to vote on are “gays, guns & god.”  You listened to a soundbite . . . You are completely missing the import of what he said . . .  and buying into the narrative that calling the facts on the ground and actually saying them out loud is somehow demeaning.

The whole “government is the problem not the solution” meme was developed to convince poor and angry whites that only lazy people of color were stealing their hard-earned tax dollars.  That “those unworthy people,” were taking something they weren’t entitled to.

There has been a widely acknowledged and widely discussed southernn strategy in play since the Nixon years.  That strategy has been all about whipping up white anger at the “other.”

These voters have been cutting off their noses to spite their faces for years.  It isn’t a shock . . . and it is the truth . . .but, of course, we aren’t allowed to speak the truth . . . and are accused of being elitist when we do.

And because you actually can see that this dynamic has been tearing our country apart and say it out loud that means that you are someone who thinks that the country should be run and ruled by the elite?  Because that is what an “elitist” is . . . 

Your analaysis is competely whack . . .

Report this

By jleman, April 16, 2008 at 7:36 am Link to this comment

cyrena, very well put.
tdbach, you’ve hit the nail on the head while cyrena just painted the base line of reasons why the “pack” should be busy pulling into the justice system members of the media and their connections to the elitists controlling the issues(media) and the political scene. Pulling these people out from the shadows and placing their names on the internet along with any public data available into a dossier would make it easier to investigate and follow their activities. Make them known!
Pulling them into the justice system certainly won’t serve any justice but it will expose them and make them place energies into defensive positions. It is also certain they have the means to squash most if not all inquiries but in the long run pictures will be painted and dots will form. Even those blue collar workers get the message they’ve been screwed and by whom. Give them targets. Show them where their jobs went: into the pockets of who; for how much? Who are the mysterious “shareholders”? Give us pictures of them. Where do they live? What are their license plates on their cars? In what city, in what country do they live? Any telephone numbers? Relatives? What stocks do they have? What groups are they associated with?
Freedom? Hey people. Can someone put up a website like a wiki to profile these people?
If I have the resources I can purchase just about any information on any of you reading these posts but can you know who is shifting money, jobs, paying politicians and affecting the bottom line for whole towns, cities, states, and regions for “a little more profit” which they put into their pockets. Of course, with a liitle more money in their pockets they can do the same for this company over there, and another over there. You know, the one just down the road where some of your family works!
How about a “transparency Wiki” for an “open society”?

Report this

By Expat, April 16, 2008 at 6:58 am Link to this comment

^ a gifted and perceptive analysis.  Well said, well said.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 16, 2008 at 6:54 am Link to this comment


Appreciate you comments for a change, but I am not running for the White House. Actually you may be correct, in your point of view, but seems I handle it differently than you.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 6:41 am Link to this comment

Well said. Excellent analysis. And you are completely right. Instead of dealing with rural or Regan Democrta’s legitinate concerns too many Democratic candudates dimiss their concerns and tell them they should think or believe diferently.

I think it is high time that the Democratic Party go back to the party of FDR and JFK.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 6:33 am Link to this comment

RE:  Media bought and sold for

FDR and JFK celebrated the values of hard working Americans, the traditional and historical base of the Democratic Party, and won hearts, minds and most important elections.

Starting with Adlai Stevenson, however, Democratic politicians started telling Americans what was wrong with them and created a doctrine of condescension toward working class Americans and what they considered their coarse and vulgar, even wrong beliefs and ways.

And for the most part Democratic candidates began losing Presidential elections ever since. The list of Democratic losers is impressive: McGovern,  Mondale, Dukakis, Carter, Gore, Kerry.

Michael Barone (senior writer for U.S. News & World Report)  said, “Stevenson was the first leading Democratic politician to become a CRITIC rather than a CELEBRATOR of middle-class American culture—the prototype of the liberal Democrat who would judge ordinary Americans by an abstract standard and find them wanting.”

Stevenson, like Obama, energized young, educated professionals for whom, Barone wrote, “what was attractive was not his platform but his attitude.” They sought from Stevenson “not so much changes in public policy as validation of their own cultural stance.” They especially rejected “American exceptionalism, the notion that the United States was specially good and decent,”

You can turn up your nose, Leefeller, at this group of voters, but a candidate cannot win the White House without them.

You can rail against the lying media and shout to the world they do not want to deal with the truth.  You can be part of the “blame America first” crowd. And you may be right with your analysis.

But that will not win the White House.

Hillary has been winning Reagan Democrats in the primaries. Obama has not. And after his condescending remarks about them and what is wrong with them, (gun toting, bible thumping, bigots) he won’t.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 16, 2008 at 6:27 am Link to this comment

Blind faith is a failing. Great insight and enlightenment tdbach.

Report this

By cyrena, April 16, 2008 at 6:23 am Link to this comment

•  “I recall way back in the archives of me mind, the saying “The truth will set you free.” How worthy this quote is remains to be seen.”

Leefeller, since this is a very favorite adage for me, and one that I believe is indeed VERY worthy, I’d like to “wax philosophical” on it for a moment. I believe that its worth has already been proven, at least on the INDIVIDUAL level. In other words, many INDIVIDUALS have gained their own ideological and psychological freedom (of their own minds and lives) by way of obtaining and then acknowledging the “truth”. And, it so doing, WE ARE SET FREE, even if the dynamics of those truths appear to be restrictive of any ostensible freedom. Even if that truth only makes us totally cognizant of our limitations; that is STILL a measure of freedom. Even if that truth reveals that we ARE in fact dependant on others for whatever we need to survive, that is FREEDOM, because we can then make rational and pragmatic choices, based on the realities of those very TRUTHS!

So, with that said, I believe the truth is very liberating.

•  “Every time the truth surfaces, it has been attacked with such fury, digesting it becomes impossible for the common person.”

The truth is attacked, (and intentionally muddled) specifically so that it CANNOT be digested by the common person. And, we need only look at the realities of not only our OWN history as an American society, but the history of MOST peoples, who have been intentionally controlled by a minority of a ruling class. If the truth is likely to ‘set the masses free’ than that totally upsets the real plans of any who would attempt to keep others enslaved. That IS the human history.

•  “The media, the powers that be, the elite special interests are upset because truth is to be kept well hidden behind their curtain of lies.”

And this is because…..the truth DOES set us free, and FREE, is NOT what THEY want us to be! I wasn’t trying to rhyme there, but that’s essentially what I’m saying to prove the point.

In short, despite all of the rhetoric of the Constitution and beyond, there is absolutely NO desire for the PTB, for ‘we the people’ TO BE FREE! And that’s why it’s such a cruel paradox, to pay lip service to an ideology that was supposedly born on the overwhelming desire and determination that all people are created equally, and that we’re supposedly intent on liberty and justice for all.

Liberty is the LAST thing the PTB want for ‘the masses’ and since the truth can and does provide for that liberty, (or freedom if you will) the real goal is to prevent the truth from coming to the attention of the common person.

So yes, I’m convinced that ‘the truth’ does indeed set us free, as individuals and as a collective body of individuals. That’s why this ‘truth’ is an enemy of any would be dictator or class of people who only benefit themselves, by keeping the rest of us enslaved. For them, any ‘truth’ is the ultimate enemy, and they will do whatever they can, (and make it the very highest priority) to keep that truth hidden.

That’s when truth-tellers become the object of their venom and fury, to be crushed at all costs.

Remember…those are 2 of the 10 most important ingredients to establishing an all-controlling fascist or other Authoritarian state. CRUSH dissention, and CONTROL the media. Both (and more) are designed to prevent that TRUTH that is most likely to ‘set us free’.

Report this

By NewPatriot4Reason, April 16, 2008 at 6:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Senator Obama handles himself so well because he speaks to an American audience he believes has the ability to think critically and rationally. Critical thought as in the ability to see several sides of an issue, process the jumble, and make an intelligent decision for themselves. Most main stream media just pollute the airwaves with shallow controversy, hype, and anti-intellectual bilge to pander Americans for ratings—reducing any real worth to the public.

The utmost absurdity here, is the high level of education many of these hyperbolic media fight promoters have—read their bios. What happened along the way that persuaded them to prostitute themselves to viewers? Fat paychecks with amenities no doubt. We might as well be watching Don King, or WWF screaming wrestlers flash us blurbs on cards about what might have happened that day.

Senator Obama keeps it real, and keeping it real means being able to identify with people. Not just claiming you identify, with melodramatic staged performances tugging on emotion like most of the other candidates have done—this insults the American intelligence. If you have ever taken an acting class, these insincere tactics jump out as bad acting. Obama doesn’t lower himself to this. Instead he is courageous and connected enough, to reach an open minded person.

Bitter Pensylvanians? Of course they are, he knows it, and he knows there are bitter Americans everywhere tired of being philosophically raped by Washington. If America is to pull itself out of this manic depressive state we have to use our brains and look ourselves in the mirror.

A phone in caller on a CSPAN show recently said pathetically, that he was hesitant to vote for a woman or a black because “his religion” didn’t believe in putting them in a position of power. This ignorant and archaic line of thought is what helped America to sink the way we have. Not only is that irrational and something from the Dark Ages, that kind of thought hampers thought for a greater America in the 21st century.

Obama is keeping it real. I know people (R), that live in the woods and the entire family is run by a patriarchal system. HE dictates to the rest of the family how they will vote. This is one families twisted version of American democracy. Honor thy father and thy mother? Sure I do, to a point. But not when it infringes on my personal rights, personal mental and emotional health, or as a human being and voting American.

They run to their Bibles and guns? How is that inflammatory? IT IS REAL, and Obama knows it, and is courageous enough to speak about it.

If “we are what we eat”, then that obviously applies to the news we take in. If America yearns for a healthier mind in a healthier body, they need to watch The News Hour with Jim Lehrer on PBS, instead of that brain numbbing, high fat content, fast food news that clogs up the rest of the airwaves.

I am also a retired Marine Corps veteran with 20 yrs active service.


Report this

By tdbach, April 16, 2008 at 6:19 am Link to this comment

Mr. Kutler is right, of course, about the media and its appetite for sensationalism. No comely blond gone missing? No celebrity trial on the docket? Well, a classically elitist comment from the man who would be king of the common folk will have to do. With enough air (time) and an assist from the bellows of pundetry and campaign adversaries, we could have a scandal raging in no time!

But before you get your panties in a twist about the decedent state of American journalism, you’d better come nose-to-nose with the unfortunate truth that started all this: Obama screwed up. In his statement, Obama resorted to the classic - and, yes, elitist – liberal Democratic caricature of blue-collar rural America as helplessly buffeted by the winds of Washington and easily lead against their interest by clever campaigners who play their simpleminded religious and lifestyle (hunting, heterosexuality) impulses like a fiddle to win their votes. Hell, Kutler and a good number of Obama’s supporters here take his assessment as an article of faith.  True enough, poorer Americans vote against their interest when they vote Republican, but then so do a lot of other middle-class people who are comfortably above the poverty line. What’s become an unfortunate article of faith among Democratic leaders is that these rural, marginally employed blue-collar voters do it because Republicans trick them into it by playing on their ignorance and frustration. And that’s what Obama was saying. And believe me, this group of voters didn’t like this depiction of them when they first heard it, and they like it less every day.

The truth is these people are as smart (and as stupid) as the rest of the population. Like everyone else, they are motivated foremost by pocketbook issues that affect the fortunes of their families. Karl Rove would like his clients to think that his manipulations of “wedge” issues has made all the difference, and liberal leaders are only too happy to accept his nonsense as fact to excuse their failing to win elections. But we liberals need to face the fact that Republican conservatives actually won the pocketbook debate with the promise of lower taxes, reduced or eliminated Welfare (see: taxes), and reversed affirmative action (partly racist, perhaps, but certainly a very real fear of diminished opportunity). We on the Left have failed to make our case that higher, steeply progressive taxes not only distribute prosperity far more broadly, but in fact improve the economic health of the country as a whole. We have failed to convince voters above the poverty line that antipoverty programs aren’t a give-away to undeserving parasites, but a crucial foundation for broad prosperity. And we failed to persuade wage earners that it is worth some sacrifices, born by everyone across the socioeconomic spectrum, to defeat racism, which is a disease that compromises the health of our nation as surely as an autoimmune disease debilitates the body.

Since our esteemed leaders don’t have the courage to make our case on the merits, they turn to stereotypes of rural blue-collar voters as dupes to a Republican scam as their excuse for failing to win elections and – even more bizarrely, to persuade those same voters to vote for them. The implication, of course, is that we liberal intellectuals are smart enough to spot the scam, even if you’re not.  It’s not a very persuasive argument to rally these voters to the cause of a liberal candidate, I’m afraid. It looks, sounds, and smells an awful lot like – dare I say it? – elitism.. And it doesn’t take MSNBC, McCain, or Hillary Clinton to point it out.

Obama, Clinton (because she could just as easily made the same point) had better change the tone and substance of our message to rural voters, or we’re in for a long and frustrating life in the political wilderness.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 16, 2008 at 6:02 am Link to this comment

Bert, skewed as your perspective is your well chosen facts and twisted truths are what we find issue with.

You do seem to play the fear thing quite well, why does it bother you when someone calls it to your attention?

Propaganda to me, facts to you Bert. 

Your US is not the one I see Bert, you just do not get it do you? 

If my perspective is correct you support Hillary with a blind eye to the truth, for she offers little more than Bush when it comes to anything remotely resembling truth.

Bert, congrats, you voiced your opinion, if real I find that refreshing.

Report this

By bert, April 16, 2008 at 5:50 am Link to this comment

I do not say nasty things. I point out truths and facts that cannot be disputed, because if they could you would certainly post them. Or if they can be refuted you are simply too lazy to research the facts and present them to me.

You prefer the lazy person’s way of handling the truth, you name call.

Furthermore, I have NEVER posted outright lies such as the Muslim or madrassa things. I strictly point our inconsistencies on his positions and on his lack of experience and his political associations as they relate to how he may govern and has governed on the past.

All of those are legitimate vetting of a candidate seeking the Presidency of the land.

And finally, my undergarments have no place in this discussion. You are no gentleman and you have no manners. Talk about nasty. Talk about a lack of manners on a public forum. Talk about immature, childish, and juvenile.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 16, 2008 at 5:45 am Link to this comment

We get what we they pay for a special interest media that provides propaganda for their agenda.

“Older voters gravitate to Hillary Clinton because they’re too wise to be fooled by Barack Obama’s rhetoric, former president Bill Clinton told Pennsylvania voters today.”

“Clinton predictably blasted Obama, saying she was “taken aback” by his “demeaning remarks,” which, she told Indianapolis plant workers, were “elitist and out of touch.”

“People don’t need a president who looks down on them,” she said.

No these are not condescending or trite, just meaty chewy issues that speak of nothing. As an older voter, I find issue and insult with the above statements for Hillary and Bill. Do you see much difference from Bush? 

I recall way back in the archives of me mind, the saying “The truth will set you free.”  How worthy this quote is remains to be seen.  Every time the truth surfaces, it has been attacked with such fury, digesting it becomes impossible for the common person.  Truth has teased us, just enough to broaden our appetites for more.  The media, the powers that be, the elite special interests are upset because truth is to be kept well hidden behind their curtain of lies.  Obama has provided some truth, glimpses only to be trashed by status quo Hillary, McCain and their paid poodles the mass media, or should I say they are the poodles?

Question Authority, not!

Report this

By tdbach, April 16, 2008 at 5:39 am Link to this comment

You obviously have no understanding of the physics of politics. By encouraging unity of type and aspirations for type, those “on top” would be securing and expanding their dominance. However, that same call to action from within those who have been held down, is smart, noble, and laudible. The more I learn about Mr. Wright, the more I like him.

Report this

By Aegrus, April 16, 2008 at 5:20 am Link to this comment

More to the point, perhaps, is we cannot completely disown ourselves from our government’s misdeeds because I feel if it becomes a, “oh, it’s just those people who are bad.” issue and we don’t take any responsibility… it might happen again.

It seems imperative to me we change how we think of these actions, and the culture in our society which allows it to thrive. We’re the enemy in a culture war against poor, free-thinking and Constitution-Adhering Americans. It is partially our fault if we lose.

Report this

By fast, April 16, 2008 at 5:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)


Why do you call it “100 million dollar income” without clarifying that that, over the 10 years and divided by two, is more like a 5.2 mil income average per annum…
which is plenty…but not exactly a 100 million dollar income.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 15, 2008 at 9:42 pm Link to this comment

Oh…C’mon bert.

Don’t get your panties in a bundle.  You know you’ve said enough nasty things here to us “Obamabots” to fill a 5-gallon bucket with a hole in it…  LOL

Report this

By GrammaConcept, April 15, 2008 at 9:32 pm Link to this comment

Thank You, Trevor…..Thank You for speaking logic that should, by now, be simple math…..

Ah….We Strive On….

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 15, 2008 at 8:49 pm Link to this comment

John McCain gets doughnuts, with sprinkles (his favorite) from the “media”; they even give him coffee…just the way he likes it, with just a little cream and just a little sugar.

The Democratic candidate better know how to cook up some finger-lickin’ ribs…

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 15, 2008 at 8:45 pm Link to this comment

Actually, Bubba, the administration’s torture policy is news.  Just this week it was revealed that torture was discussed and decided up on the principles meetings…before it happened.  Previously, the administration basically claimed that the President was involved after the fact…or rather uninvolved.  Now it is clear that the President was a co-conspirator in breaking international - and American - law.

Report this

By bert, April 15, 2008 at 8:33 pm Link to this comment

Not according to one poll (Rasmussen or SurveyUSA, can’t remember which) in, of all palces PA. There both Clinton and Obama were bearing McCaun by 6 or 7%. Pretty interesting.

I only read the broad numbers, not the explanation so I don’t know what they found.

But maybe it is when people hear and see both these candidates debate they understand that either of these two would be better than McCain.

Just a thought.

Report this

By bert, April 15, 2008 at 8:27 pm Link to this comment

That sound you are hearing….......I love it. Hammer hitting nail.

Yes, it is soooooo amazing that for a man who says words count, and words matter he finds himslef in
the position of having to explain, and explain, and explain what he REALLY meant so very often. Great orator my backside!

Report this

By bert, April 15, 2008 at 8:20 pm Link to this comment

“Bill caused Al Gore to lose the election in 2000”

Say what?

I thought it was Al Gore - who would not let Bill campaign for him - and the lousy campaign chairman Shrum and chairwoman Brazille who lost that election. Plus a good deal of Republican chicanery and the Supremes.

Well silly me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Must be nice to make up history. Did you used to get A’s in school for doing that?

Report this

By bert, April 15, 2008 at 8:11 pm Link to this comment

“And these same lying, cheating, fear-mongering nasties come here and attempt to muddy up the comments with their propaganda.  They haven’t a valid comment or an interesting point.  They are simply liars and degenerates.”

Yes!!!! How dare they exercise their Constitutional 1st Amendment right to free speech and to exercise in the old Greek/Aristotle/Plato idea of debate and the airing of all sides of the issue!!!!!!!!! G*D DAMN AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!! There is that better? Do you like that a bit more, Outraged? I think I have heard you defending that kind of speech before. Hey!! That felt good. Maybe I will do it more often.

Report this

By Fernando, April 15, 2008 at 7:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What do you expect from people who make a living kowtowing to the rich elites?  Obama as an unknown quantity not fully under their control represents a real threat to the existence of the rich and their puppets in the media.  That is why they have used every opportunity to diminish him and elevate those proven liars, the Billary.

Report this
CJ's avatar

By CJ, April 15, 2008 at 7:39 pm Link to this comment

Kutler’s right of course, especially regarding any truth ever being uttered. And Obama is right about bitterness and antipathy (let’s hope?), though it’s true that lots of people who’ve lost good-paying jobs loved guns and bible just as much before losing good jobs. Far as those two things go, it’s reasonable to ask how naïve Obama really is—culturally, anyway.

Meanwhile, both Clinton and McCain have gone off the deep-end in making such a fuss. So much so, both are coming over as bitter themselves. But then…

those two know media better than does Obama. Clinton and McCain well know how the game is played, that pandering is the name of the game, that it’s a whole lot more important to be loved by big media than by the rest of us. Hillary’s never been treated fairly by media, which doesn’t mean she shouldn’t fire her campaign staff for sending her off the deep end on this one. She’s making a fool of herself carrying on (with McCain) about “elitism.” All three candidates are in fact elitists, along with those who appear in big media, not to mention owners of big media.

Of course truth is off-limits! Most important to candidates and to big media is maintenance of illusion of egalitarian democracy. Chomsky cites Lippmann’s contention that there were/are two democracies—one for himself and his ilk, and one for the rest of us. Maybe candidates and big media personalities can be forgiven for forgetting that what Lippmann wrote then is even more true now. So lost in ideological nonsense do those who’ve succeed in political/media meritocracy get, they for-get that wealth is relative to poverty, poverty essential to the accumulation of wealth. Assuming now any ever learned that much. Which is how come Clinton and McCain sound so utterly hollow to those who reside in reality as the two of them assail another of their own class. Otherwise, plutocracy (see all Senators and many members of the House), kleptocracy (see Blackwater, Halliburton, ExxonMobil, Halliburton and Parsons, among so many others, including General Electric), and aristocracy (old money).

America is only minimally democratic in substance, more so formally. Confusion is not surprising given conflict between ideology and reality. Talk of values in the context of so much confusion results only in bitter comedy, tragically enough.

I first heard “breaking news” on CNN, not on MSNBC. News consisted of Obama’s remarks, which, apparently, had just been learned of. As Kutler suggests, one might think “breaking news” would amount to no less than a statement on the part of one or another of candidates of a radically new idea/policy. I.e., if not pulling out troops inside six weeks, then single-payer healthcare, as opposed to so-called “universal healthcare.”

Still, MSNBC has hit rock bottom insofar as management seems to regard ABC’s, “The View,” as the best model for its 24/7 coverage of all things political. Most on-air personalities there (but for “Morning Joe”) are Birkenstock liberals. What matters far more is that MSNBC is the love child of Microsoft and General Electric, both of which “bring good things to life.”

Having said that, it’s worth noting that Abrams’ program has become the best on MSNBC. He had the gall this evening to suggest that the public doesn’t much care what Obama said (based on emails he’s received, apparently). Indeed. So how come big media in general (MSNBC not less than Fox) continues in role as Gossip Central? Because to acknowledge truth would involve exposing America’s “democratic” ideology for the fraud it’s patently become. One can’t be an elitist in fact, while at the same time laying claim to being a person of the (lesser) people. Lippmann—way back then—was more honest regarding where he and those for whom he labored stood in relation to the vast, vast majority of his countrymen, never mind those not American.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 15, 2008 at 7:27 pm Link to this comment

The media has been smearing Obama and every candidate of any integrity.  They want a crook in the WH, it’s “good for business.”  From Media Matters:

“In recent months, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has been the target of attacks, smears, and innuendo throughout the media. He has been called a Muslim who attended a madrassa and has heard his Christian church in Chicago accused of having a “separatist” doctrine that “contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity”; he has been accused of lying about issues he first addressed in 1995; the media have misrepresented or ignored his past statements to accuse him of dishonesty; he has fended off baseless accusations of scandals; and he has heard playground insults mocking his name and has even listened to media figures question his racial identity.”

And these same lying, cheating, fear-mongering nasties come here and attempt to muddy up the comments with their propaganda.  They haven’t a valid comment or an interesting point.  They are simply liars and degenerates.

Report this

By BobZ, April 15, 2008 at 6:16 pm Link to this comment

Watching the Cable News Network and the MSM, it is apparent that the television media is incapable of any intelligent discourse on the various gaffes that have taken place recently by McCain, Clinton, and Obama. They try to explain complex issues via sound bytes and taking speeches out of context and then poorly analyze and interpret. Only the newspapers, blog sites, and news magizines seem to be able to go into any depth on any issue whether wedge issues or major policy issues. The media also does a poor job in controlling obviously biased experts from putting their own spin on events. A perfect example is Fox News letting Karl Rove basically call Obama a “Marxist” without calling him on it. And the selection of some of the so called experts is absolutely pathetic. You have to wonder where they find some of these so called experts. Even during all of the debates none of the media could resist asking some pretty dumb questions and waste the candidates time and the audience, when there are so many important topics to discuss. The television executives need to try treating us like adults that can understand and appreciate and intelligent discussion.

Report this

By Mac Walton, April 15, 2008 at 5:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ocjim: Please add me to the disgusted list. 

I’m not a Democrat or Republican but an independent. But I have some respect for a guy with a diverse resume as top law student from a private school, a very good organizer of laid-off steelworkers and others living in projects in Chicago, a law professor at the University of Chicago for over a decade, a State Senator of 8 years. Obama is a part of the elite in that he is one of the brightest (if not the brightest) politician in the Democratic party, a politician who can regenerate the party by bringing new blood, young people from all cultures.

What troubles me is the fact that big shots Democrats are allowing Hillary to do John McCain’s bidding of besmirching this fine man’s reputation and, at the same time, destroy the its party. Bill caused Al Gore to lose the election in 2000; and, if the party isn’t careful, Hillary’s constant Rove-type attacks will cause Barack to be unelected in 2008.

Report this

By cyrena, April 15, 2008 at 4:36 pm Link to this comment

status quo/criminals to ‘fear’ Barack

Well, here’s something interesting…or at least it will be to some of you, if you’re among the American’s who wanna know this stuff.

(I DEFINITELY do smile )

Unlike what we already KNOW we could expect from a Clinton or McCain presidency…(all of the criminals of the past 8 years walk off into the sunset, or Dubai, or Paraquay…)Obama appears to be planning on some investigation of the crimes of the 21st Century. He’s cautious (of course he usually is) but here’s the article with the remainder at the link

Obama Would Ask His AG to “Immediately Review” Potential of Crimes in Bush White House
  By Will Bunch
  The Philadelphia Inquirer
  Monday 14 April 2008

  Tonight I had an opportunity to ask Barack Obama a question that is on the minds of many Americans, yet rarely rises to the surface in the great ruckus of the 2008 presidential race - and that is whether an Obama administration would seek to prosecute officials of a former Bush administration on the revelations that they greenlighted torture, or for other potential crimes that took place in the White House.

  Obama said that as president he would indeed ask his new Attorney General and his deputies to “immediately review the information that’s already there” and determine if an inquiry is warranted - but he also tread carefully on the issue, in line with his reputation for seeking to bridge the partisan divide. He worried that such a probe could be spun as “a partisan witch hunt.” However, he said that equation changes if there was willful criminality, because “nobody is above the law.”

  The question was inspired by a recent report by ABC News, confirmed by the Associated Press, that high-level officials including Vice President Dick Cheney and former Cabinet secretaries Colin Powell, John Ashcroft and Donald Rumsfeld, among others, met in the White House and discussed the use of waterboarding and other torture techniques on terrorism suspects.

  I mentioned the report in my question, and said “I know you’ve talked about reconciliation and moving on, but there’s also the issue of justice, and a lot of people - certainly around the world and certainly within this country - feel that crimes were possibly committed” regarding torture, rendition, and illegal wiretapping. I wanted to know how whether his Justice Department “would aggressively go after and investigate whether crimes have been committed.”

  Here’s his answer, in its entirety:

Gotta connect to the link for the rest..

Report this

By TheRealFish, April 15, 2008 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment


“His supporters, (most brain-washed by now) are acting like the brain-washed cult members of the Texas compound recently raided…”

Can you not even see how elitist and condescending *that* type of thinking is???

It smacks of Talking Points, and without much reflection.

How is it that us “brain washed” Manchurian elitist zombies can even speak?

How is it that we who can do no independent thinking believe we see “this back and forth between the two” that is making you start to “lean for McCain” all began back about the time that darned kitchen sink was unplugged to dump on all of us? You remember, “kitchen sink” as the phrase was coined in this current contest by a Clinton campaign strategist in one of those morning conference calls? As in that the Clinton campaign was about to throw the kitchen sink at Obama (and, really, any other Democrat that gets in her way toward the Oval Office; ask Bill “Judas” Richardson)?

As for the media being “pro Obama and con Hillary”? Wow.

He failed to express clearly enough for a general audience the thought that Republicans (mainly) used “God, guns and gays” forms of red meat in past elections to get everyone all stirred up and to the polls then, as soon as they were elected, dropped their pushes for putting the 10 Commandments in the courthouse or overturning Roe v. Wade or writing that constitutional amendment to limit gay people’s freedoms or allowing everybody and their daughters to buy TOW missiles at the gun shop of their choice.

People feel bitter about being used in that way. Ask David Kuo (google him if you’re not familiar…).

So he didn’t speak clearly. That is what this is all about. It’s not the type of “mis speaking” that has someone dodging gun fire while running across the tarmac over and over, though that only happened in fantasy land.

And, between those two types of statement, which do you think received more air time? More heated discussion? Did you see MSNBC drop the “breaking news” bomb with the text crawl “Clinton caught lying about time is Tusla”?

No. They sipped the cool aid talking point of “mis speak,” repeated it a few times and wanted to let it drop. Except that Bill kept bringing it up.

It would have only had a media shelf-life of maybe 2-3 days if the former Prez hadn’t kept stepping in it.

But Obama is less than clear? Less than his usual eloquent self for a few minutes at a private gathering? Hey! That’s all out war across the air waves for four, five days or a week.

But then, I’m just brain washed. I can’t handle that sort of fore-brain reasoning. I must be wrong. I guess I should just be bitter and cling to my sacred Obama icons, Right? And crawl into that corner where the majority of Democratic voters and their delegates are now cowering.

Report this

By Margaret Currey, April 15, 2008 at 2:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There was a segment on either Nightline or PBS about a girl from Egypt, who wore a headscarf but had friends who did not.

On this program it was also stated as the freedoms of the people tighten the majority turn to religion that is more radical, sounds something like what Obama said, so is he really above the people.

Clinton is not an average Josephine she is not the boilermaker person that she pretends to be and she is not the gun toting person that she pretends to be, she is just morping into what the people want.

She would make a good president, but then so would Obama without the baggage that the Repubs are certain to bring out.

Report this

By felicity, April 15, 2008 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment

They do and they’re bitter about it.  Our government, which now directs about 50 percent of our/its discretionary budget to the extensive military-industrial complex has to get the mega-bucks from somewhere. The poor, the middle-class can generate just so much in taxes, and apparently it’s not enough to support the complex.

If the rich are upset about their taxes, let them get upset with who or what wants their money.  Ironically, it’s more often than not those who have benefitted from government largesse in the first place who resent having to come up with the taxes to guarantee that their government contracts keep coming, that their subsidies remain in place.

I refer you to a pet Republican mantra, There are no free lunches.

Report this

By bert, April 15, 2008 at 2:38 pm Link to this comment

Kool aid party anyone?

Report this

By cyrena, April 15, 2008 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment


Great reponse, but ya’s more than this standard ignorance with Lee. The kind is the epitome of the dyed-in-the-wool racist/bigot. Seriously..he’s like the original KKK, and maybe worse.

For people like that, there is absolutely nothing that penetrates their hate. It’s what motivates them, and it’s what keeps them breathing. If Lee didn’t have his hatred for black people, his life would be totally without meaning.

(not that it has any, but you know what I’m saying). Seriously..all of this stuff is straight out of the hate propaganda books, which actually goes deeper than just repug rhetoric. It’s plain old race hate…pure and simple.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 15, 2008 at 2:12 pm Link to this comment

So Lee, are you saying it would be wrong for white people to do this…?

Report this

By cyrena, April 15, 2008 at 2:06 pm Link to this comment

I dunno Aegrus..I mean that I dunno how responsible we are for the fact that the media has totally disintergrated.

I mean, at least in this context, and with what Kutler is talking about, I don’t know that we can blame ourselves. I’d be willing to, but I know perfectly well how totally desperate I was for REAL information until we finally started seeing some on alternative media, in websites like this, but that didn’t start happening until 2004 or 2005 or so. Consortium News had been around for a while, and a few others. But in all honesty, (and depending on where one lived in the country) we were left TOTALLY in the dark, and far more so after this ultra secretive cabal highjacked us, and basically co-opted all of the media, and turned it into their own propaganda machine. (like any other fascist regime does).

So, we can blame ourselves only to a degree, and even then, not all of us. Folks have been political prisoners (subjected to unfair arrest and detention) since AT least the Convention in 2004, where they swept up a thousand or so peaceful demonstrators in New York.

And, some people are still doing it, and still being arrested everytime.

Remember all the millions that turned out world wide to demonstrate against the invasion of Iraq before it was launched? Did our media cover it? Nope. European and some other media did…but not here…

So, everybody was kept stupid for a real long time.

Report this

By Robert, April 15, 2008 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Turn away from the train wreck that is cable news. That’s my advice. They can only get away with it so long as we support it by turning our heads to see the carnage… as we will inevitably continue to do. :(

Report this

By cyrena, April 15, 2008 at 1:29 pm Link to this comment

^ including the media

I realize this isn’t ‘new’ information, since we’ve been hearing of it for several years now, most notably with the Judicial Coup of 2000, that basically kicked it off. It has been on-going since then of course, and is tied to so many of the scandals that have plagued the DOJ and multiple other agencies/institutions of the government. But, while we’ve heard and/or read about all of these things in disconnected pieces, this is an excerpt from a new publication, that connects all of the dots…leading the path to hell on earth…at least for most of us.

It’s a lengthy piece. The link to the remainder is at the bottom.
How Republicans Quietly Hijacked the Justice Department to Swing Elections
  By Steven Rosenfeld
  Tuesday 15 April 2008

The GOP may have committed massive vote fraud in plain sight by encouraging widespread voter purges and restricting registration campaigns.
The following is an excerpted chapter by Steve Rosenfeld from the new book “Loser Take All,” edited by Mark Crispin Miller (Ig Publishing, 2008).

  Jim Crow has returned to American elections, only in the twenty-first century, instead of men in white robes or a barrel-chested sheriff menacingly patrolling voting precincts, we are more likely to see a lawyer carrying a folder filled with briefing papers and proposed legislation about “voter fraud” and other measures to supposedly protect the sanctity of the vote.

  Since the 2004 election, activist lawyers with ties to the Republican Party and its presidential campaigns, Republican legislators, and even the Supreme Court - in a largely unnoticed ruling in 2006 - have been aggressively regulating most aspects of the voting process. Collectively, these efforts are undoing the gains of the civil rights era that brought voting rights to minorities and the poor, groups that tend to support Democrats.

  In addition, the Department of Justice (DOJ), which for decades had fought to ensure that all eligible citizens could vote, now encourages states to take steps in the opposite direction. Political appointees who advocate for stringent requirements before ballots are cast and votes are counted have driven much of the DOJ’s Voting Section’s recent agenda. As a result, the Department has pushed states to purge voter lists, and to adopt newly restrictive voter ID and provisional ballot laws. In addition, during most of George W. Bush’s tenure, the DOJ has stopped enforcing federal laws designed to aid registration, such as the requirement that state welfare offices offer public aid recipients the opportunity to register to vote.

  The Department’s political appointees have also pressured federal prosecutors to pursue “voter fraud” cases again t the Bush administration’s perceived opponents, such as ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which conduct mass registration drives among populations that tend to vote Democratic. Two former federal prosecutors have said they believe that they lost their positions for refusing to pursue these cases.

  The proponents of this renewed impetus to police voters comes from a powerful and well-connected wing of the Republican Party that believes steps are needed to protect elections from Democratic-leaning groups that are fabricating voter registrations en masse and impersonating voters. Royal Masset, the former political director of the Republican Party of Texas, said in 2007 that is an “article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections.” While Masset himself didn’t agree with that assertion, he did believe “that requiring photo IDs could cause enough of a drop off in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent to the Republican vote.”

Report this

By GrammaConcept, April 15, 2008 at 1:11 pm Link to this comment

“Is this the modern equivalent of the crumbling of the Roman Empire?”...........
Yes, but..

Being right is not enough….

Strive On.

Report this

By Peter Albertson, April 15, 2008 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

If the Dems want either one of them to win this election they have to stop hitting out at each other. It is time for them to be attacking Monster McCain and what he stands for. The polls indicate Clinton and Obama are losing strength, and I think it is because of all the negative sniping. We are not hearing about what they will do in solid and particular terms aabout the economy, the war, etc., and we do are not hearing about the dangers we face from McCain. Important to note that just because he was a prisoner in another war, that does not make him a foreign policy expert.

Report this

By Aegrus, April 15, 2008 at 12:42 pm Link to this comment

Regardless what happens, we only have ourselves to blame. When the people choose to rule again, the rules will be enforced. We just haven’t hit rock bottom yet, and this dumbass stimulus package isn’t going to cut the mustard.

I bet we will start seeing all kinds of pseudo-altruistic and charitable actions from Bush in the coming months as the economy plummets. They’ll make all the states freeze any taxes on gasoline and start throwing money and bail-outs left and right to try and keep the walls from caving in on this sinking submarine. Anything to possibly display Republicans are good for you and the economy in the final hours before the fall elections.

Report this

By ocjim, April 15, 2008 at 12:37 pm Link to this comment

Our current media, current administration, current Hillary ploys, and current narcissistic trip of our culture disgust me more than it embitters me.

I am so sick of Hillary and the media trying to sensationalize and turn to her/their advantage every word uttered by Obama.

It only convinces me that we can never have a decent leader of our country again because the malevolent forces are out to destroy truth and decency—Bush, Cheney and the neocons have ushered the willing media, politicians, and spectacle-loving people to utter destruction.

Is this the modern equivalent of the crumbling of the Roman Empire?

Report this

By lawlessone, April 15, 2008 at 11:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What did you expect?  Journalism is not a “profession.”  A profession is an activity that is a privilege, not a right.  A profession is an activity in which the participants must pass tests to be licensed.  A profession is an activity in which the participants are held to high ethical standards for which they can lose their license if they fail to obey.  Ethics that required more concern for abstract principles than the bottom dollar.  None of that is true for today’s reporters.

Besides, this country is already a dictatorship in all but name.  The Neocons have successfully converted every single branch of government into purely partisan agencies of Neocon interests from the so-called Justice Department to the Supreme Court.  The entire military establishment seems only to serve the Neocon greed, callousness, hatred, paranoia and destructiveness.  Those few government entities they don’t dominate or re-purpose have been reduced to drooling ineffectiveness.  What made you believe that the media was not a Neocon target for takeover as well?

The news media has long been owned lock, stock and barrel by the campaign contributors to and fellow travelers with the Neocon leadership squatting in the White House, an occupancy seized under false pretenses.  Those media owners, eager to share in the Neocon spoils, have been squeezing out opposition employees with varying degrees of speed.  Nothing like the power of the paycheck to control what is said by reporters and pundits.

Some news operations, like Fox News, are open about their status as PR departments for the Neocon theocracy.  Others seem somewhat less proud of the coup against democracy and freedom, but are almost as overt in their bias against anyone or anything still actively fighting the new dictatorship we are in.

The only mystery is why the Neocons and their stooges like the press seem so dedicated to destroying every single thing America once stood for and why they are so willing to cripple its military, its economy and its future to serve their short term greed.  They have even been attacking everything the Republican Party once stood for back when Tom McCalls and Nelson Rockefellers and Teddy Roosevelts and Abraham Lincolns were permitted to be members.  It is almost as if the Neocons are in league with our loudly declared enemies like Osama bin Laden. 

Think about it.  Everything that Osama wanted to accomplish in harming this country is being unrelentingly carried out by the Neocon junta.  Do you suppose the reason Osama cannot be found is that he shaved his beard and is working in the West Wing?

Report this

By Marshall, April 15, 2008 at 11:26 am Link to this comment

“I get ‘bitter’ more from the semi-rich to stinkin’ rich over their tax bills.”

You mean, the ones where they pay more taxes than everyone else?

Report this

By Trevor, April 15, 2008 at 11:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I don’t quite understand the point.  You seem to want to criticise Obama, then you misquote someone else.  I’d be curious how we could ever find a president who doesn’t have a good friend who believes weird things.  You really think Hillary’s friends are above reproach? You think McCain truly represents more than 10 percent of the country? Who do you suggest?
But as a white person I have no problem with that speech in its Black form.  It WOULD be a different thing to put White in there, because white people have not been systematically attacked throughout US history. What is wrong with encouraging Blacks to learn more science and math? What is wrong with encouraging a work ethic? What is wrong with encouraging buying from a local business instead of Walmart?

Report this

By Aegrus, April 15, 2008 at 11:08 am Link to this comment

Well, it is all about creating a medium and convincing people it is reputable. All the major players in the media are established names. There will always be a level of credibility to the name because the New York Times, NBC, et cetera are generations-old institutions. Just because we have a whole new generation of poor journalists and weak editors doesn’t mean the name doesn’t carry on.

The mission is to discredit these institutions as much as possible in big ways where everyone can see and understand. The obstacles are mediums and venues in which to explain the truth of our reality. Internet news and bloggers (perhaps justly) are not taken seriously because, as has been more than obvious here, anyone can say their opinion regardless of factual accuracy. I don’t think the Internet will be the method in which the mission can be realized. It will have to work through the regular platforms, and we are half-way lucky to have idiots in the FCC de-regulating everything because there is an increased ability for small progressive groups to gain traction.

The internet has been a good place to raise awareness, though. It’s just the way progressive and Left-leaning websites and bloggers have taken it upon themselves to mimic the Mainstream Media with their own biases, and lose sight of the big picture.

Movements in this country are very frequently based on the guilt-free, feel good attitude of yuppies and mindless leftites. (Like when I go to a “community farmer’s market” without meeting any farmers and seeing low-quality foods with out-of-state stickers and packaging) It makes these people feel like they are making a difference by wasting their money in an alternative venue, but (much like alternative rock) it is false, superficial and pretentious.

I am very angered by the way our individual-first, instant gratification culture has enabled people to feel they are doing good work by posting in a blog,  starting a #bushsucks channel on IRC or maybe even posting a poorly-made video on YouTube with their uninformed and ridiculously coarse opinions. While outside their bedroom, in Washington, everything continues to worsen. But they don’t get out into the streets or put real effort to change anything because they already “did their part” by posting on the internet or chatting up some drunks in a bar. Good job.

You have to have a real vision of change, and be willing to sacrifice to make it happen. This smug, holier than thou, self-righteous liberalism is why we don’t get anything accomplished. Everyone is too important, to individual to work cooperatively with others towards a real vision instead of rehashing crap they read out of a few books. Real thought, and real progress are pretty slim pickins.

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 15, 2008 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

Yes, blame them 100%, you are so right!

I don’t pay any attention to them now because I have never up till now have seen such media bias than in this years presidential election.

I don’t need them dictating to me on who to vote for.

Obama and his supporters are only now seeing what it feels like to have their candidate ruffed up so publicy. And by the looks of it they don’t like it one bit!

Obama is slipping and starting to show his true colors. His supporters, (most brain-washed by now) are acting like the brain-washed cult members of the Texas compound recently raided that know no other life except what they had there. They don’t want to believe for one second that what is being reported by Obama’s non-support media could possibly be true.

I am a Hillary fan, but, I find myself disappointed by some of the remarks she has made. My point is, at least I accept them even though I don’t like to.

The fact is that they ALL have misspoke at one time or other.  They ALL lie at one point or other.

This back and forth between the two, quite frankly, I am starting to lean for McCain.

I wish the media would report All’s misgivings and givings, not show their media bias by choosing to go pro Obama and con Hillary.

I do detect sexism plays a larger part here, than racism.

Report this

By felicity, April 15, 2008 at 10:44 am Link to this comment

It’s pretty sorry isn’t it when people’s genuine fears can’t be acknowledged. 

I’m so effin old, have been through so many presidential campaigns, have seen good presidential material dumped by the roadside based on unbelievable trivia, based on media stories completely without merit that when the Obama ‘story’ broke I really thought here-we-go-again.  Very sad.

Report this

By Lee, April 15, 2008 at 10:12 am Link to this comment

6. Adherence to the WHITE Work Ethic.  “It is becoming harder to find qualified people to work in Chicago.”  Whether this is true or not, it represents one of the many reasons given by businesses and industries for deserting the Chicago area.  We must realize that a location with good facilities, adequate transportation and a reputation for producing skilled workers will attract industry.  We are in competition with other cities, states and nations for jobs.  High productivity must be a goal of the WHITE workforce.

  7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect.  To accomplish anything worthwhile requires self-discipline.  We must be a community of self-disciplined persons if we are to actualize and utilize our own human resources, instead of perpetually submitting to exploitation by others.  Self-discipline, coupled with a respect for self, will enable each of us to be an instrument of WHITE Progress and a model for WHITE Youth.

  8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness.”  Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must be able to identify the “talented tenth” of those subjugated, especially those who show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor’s control.

    Those so identified are separated from the rest of the people by:

      1. Killing them off directly, and/or fostering a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.
      2. Placing them in concentration camps, and/or structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.
      3. Seducing them into a socioeconomic class system which, while training them to earn more dollars, hypnotizes them into believing they are better than others and teaches them to think in terms of “we” and “they” instead of “us.”
      4. So, while it is permissible to chase “middleclassness” with all our might, we must avoid the third separation method – the psychological entrapment of WHITE “middleclassness.”  If we avoid this snare, we will also diminish our “voluntary” contributions to methods A and B.  And more importantly, WHITE people no longer will be deprived of their birthright: the leadership, resourcefulness and example of their own talented persons.

  9. Pledge to Make the Fruits of All Developing and Acquired Skills Available to the WHITE Community.

  10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting WHITE Institutions.

  11. Pledge Allegiance to All WHITE Leadership Who Espouse and Embrace the WHITE Value System.

  12. Personal Commitment to Embracement of the WHITE Value System.  To measure the worth and validity of all activity in terms of positive contributions to the general welfare of the WHITE Community and the Advancement of WHITE People towards freedom.

Report this

By Lee, April 15, 2008 at 10:11 am Link to this comment

Barack Obama pledged allegience to Pastor Wright’s ‘Black Values System’
for 20 years! Here is the ‘Black Values System’ with the word ‘black’ substitued with the word ‘white’.
Does this make it appear more racist to you?

These WHITE Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever WHITES are gathered.  They consist of the following concepts:

  1. Commitment to God.  “The God of our weary years” will give us the strength to give up prayerful passivism and become WHITE Christian Activists, soldiers for Black freedom and the dignity of all humankind.

  2. Commitment to the WHITE Community.  The highest level of achievement for any WHITE person must be a contribution of strength and continuity of the WHITE Community.

  3. Commitment to the WHITE Family.  The WHITE family circle must generate strength, stability and love, despite the uncertainty of externals, because these characteristics are required if the developing person is to withstand warping by our racist competitive society.

    Those WHITE who are blessed with membership in a strong family unit must reach out and expand that blessing to the less fortunate.

  4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education.  We must forswear anti-intellectualism.  Continued survival demands that each WHITE person be developed to the utmost of his/her mental potential despite the inadequacies of the formal education process.  “Real education” fosters understanding of ourselves as well as every aspect of our environment.  Also, it develops within us the ability to fashion concepts and tools for better utilization of our resources, and more effective solutions to our problems.  Since the majority of WHITES have been denied such learning, WHITE Education must include elements that produce high school graduates with marketable skills, a trade or qualifications for apprenticeships, or proper preparation for college.

    Basic education for all WHITES should include Mathematics, Science, Logic, General Semantics, Participative Politics, Economics and Finance, and the Care and Nurture of WHITE minds.

  5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence.  To the extent that we individually reach for, even strain for excellence, we increase, geometrically, the value and resourcefulness of the WHITE Community.  We must recognize the relativity of one’s best; this year’s best can be bettered next year.  Such is the language of growth and development.  We must seek to excel in every endeavor.

Report this

By Aegrus, April 15, 2008 at 10:05 am Link to this comment

I think, semantically speaking, frightened might have caused even more blow back. Really, there isn’t a way to say something real without it being dissected as anti-American or naive. At least he’s trying to put some small level of straight talk back in the campaign.

The people who don’t hate him, won’t be upset about this comment. It’s just another media story without merit.

Report this

By Bubba, April 15, 2008 at 10:04 am Link to this comment

Stanley Kutler: “In the meantime, why aren’t we discussing the administration’s torture policy—or its proposed status-of-forces agreement with Iraq? Or are such stories too complex? The media are killing us.”

The administration’s torture policy is not news. Congress doing something effective about it would be news, and might even be covered.  Congress doing something effective and making a lot of noise would definitely be covered.  A population sitting on its ass, waiting to be consoled or entertained, is not exactly a demanding public for news.

The American media is, by and large, less than pathetic, and it’s the media American deserves.

If and when a great many Americans get off their asses, become politically involved and begin to do something politically effective, such that it brings about a different kind of politics, voila! you will have better media as well.  Don’t hold your breath.  Or hold your breath while the recession gets much worse or turns into a depression.  That might get more of you off your asses.  Maybe.

Who was it who said that Americans may be the first population to be entertained to death?

Report this

By Bubba, April 15, 2008 at 10:02 am Link to this comment

Purple Girl,

You’ve got your tinfoil hat.  It’s right there beside you.  Why don’t you just put it on?

Report this

By Bubba, April 15, 2008 at 9:57 am Link to this comment

Stanley Kutler: “In the meantime, why aren’t we discussing the administration’s torture policy—or its proposed status-of-forces agreement with Iraq? Or are such stories too complex? The media are killing us.”

The administration’s torture policy is not news. Congress doing something effective about it would be news, and might even be covered.  Congress doing something effective and making a lot of noise would definitely be covered.  A population sitting on its ass, waiting to be consoled or entertained, is not exactly a demanding public for news.

The American media is, by and large, less than pathetic, and it’s the media American deserves. 

If and when a great many Americans get off their asses, become politically involved and begin to do something politically effective, such that it brings about a different kind of politics, voila! you will have better media as well.  Don’t hold your breath.  Or hold your breath while the recession gets much worse or turns into a depression.  That might get more of you off your asses.  Maybe. 

Who was it who said that Americans may be the first population to be entertained to death?

Report this

By felicity, April 15, 2008 at 9:48 am Link to this comment

Obama had said ‘frightened’ rather than ‘bitter’ even the gossipmongering media would have been hard pressed to use the clip to ratchet up their advertising revenues.

It’s really fear that often drives people to guns, religion, hatred of the ‘other’ and real or imagined threats to their job security.  Quite understandable.

Actually I get ‘bitter’ more from the semi-rich to stinkin’ rich over their tax bills.  “I worked hard (they neglect to mention being born-to-the-manor) to make my money and now you claim a right to some of it?”  There’s your ‘bitter’ in spades.

Report this

By Aegrus, April 15, 2008 at 9:44 am Link to this comment

Cry, cry, Lee. There are a few things to be taken into account.

1) Our current media structure doesn’t do their job anymore. If they did, Kucinich would have won the nomination.

2) There isn’t anything racist about Obama’s church.

3) Claiming an American citizen, who fought in the Marine Corps, is anti-American is both false and bigoted.

4) None of the racially prejudiced, Right-Wing hate speech you, and others like you, perpetuate will stop Obama from claiming the presidency.

5) If the mainstream media was doing its job correctly, this “bitter” comment and the Wright story would never have been surfaced because both are void of any real meaning.

6) Everything you say was parroted by other hateful people almost verbatim. Therefore, your portraying yourself as a tool of the spin machine. Congratulations.

Your opinion is constantly countered by the actual facts of what is happening in reality, and not the made-up spin-world of the mainstream media. Facts are:

1) Obama has closed gaps in every state.

2) His campaign has openly brought to life realities for Americans instead of rhetoric about “experience” and “war hero.” Both claims are of skeptical validity.

3) Barack’s modern discussion of race and apathy for the political process is something we don’t hear from politicians anymore, which puts merit to his ‘voice of change’ rhetoric.

4) His bottom-up grassroots strategy is what is winning him the election. The media is not helping anyone.

5) While Obama may misspeak on occasion, he doesn’t completely change sides on really hot-button issues like John McCain and Hillary Clinton have, id est abortion rights, NAFTA and tax cuts.

The bottom-up strategy will work this year. Where Dean failed, Obama will succeed. People like you never offer real debate, just the talking points I’ve read time and time again from Republican, Conservative and heavy Right-Wing talking heads. Since Hillary has chosen to mimic people like YOU instead of having real discussions about her merits, which I often admit are many, she has invalidated her candidacy.

Grow up. You’ve already lost. Think for yourself, eh?

Report this

By Bubba, April 15, 2008 at 9:39 am Link to this comment

You’ve got your tinfoil hat.  It’s right there beside you.  Why don’t you just put it on?

Report this

By Bubba, April 15, 2008 at 9:36 am Link to this comment

Thank you for the crock.

Report this

By DemocratICnproud, April 15, 2008 at 9:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Oh, the irony of it all. The man bases his entire campaign on the premise that “WORDS COUNT” and then repeatedly must try to extracate himself from the quicksand that his words lead him into. I am an HRC supporter and will support either of our candidates in November but Obama and his camp would make it much easier for most of us if he/they would reduce the arrogant persona just a tad.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook