Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 22, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Loss of Rainforests Is Double Whammy Threat to Climate






Truthdig Bazaar
Churchill

Churchill

By Paul Johnson
$14.97

more items

 
Report

Race and the Tea Party’s Ire

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Nov 2, 2010
Flickr / ~db~ (CC-BY-ND)

Smearing the president: an anti-Obama poster.

By Eugene Robinson

The first African-American president takes office, and almost immediately we see the birth of a big, passionate national movement—overwhelmingly white and lavishly funded—that tries its best to delegitimize that president, seeks to thwart his every initiative, and manages to bring the discredited and moribund opposition party roaring back to life. Coincidence?

Not a chance. But also not that simple.

First, I’ll state the obvious: It’s not racist to criticize President Obama, it’s not racist to have conservative views, and it’s not racist to join the tea party. But there’s something about the nature and tone of the most vitriolic attacks on the president that I believe is distinctive—and difficult to explain without asking whether race is playing a role.

One thing that struck me from the beginning about the tea party rhetoric was the idea of reclaiming something that has been taken away.

At a recent campaign rally in Paducah, Ky., Senate candidate Rand Paul, a darling of the tea party movement, drew thunderous applause when he said that if Republicans win, “we get to go to Washington and take back our government.”

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
Take it back from whom? Maybe he thinks it goes without saying, because he didn’t say.

On Sunday, in a last-minute fundraising appeal, Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee implored his supporters to help “return American government to the American people.”

Again, who’s in possession of the government right now, if not the American people? The non-American people? The un-American people?

There’s an obvious answer, but it’s one that generally comes from the progressive end of the political spectrum: Americans must fight to take back their government from the lobbyists and big-money special interests that shape our laws to suit their own interests, not for the good of the nation.

That may be what some tea partyers have in mind, but the movement hasn’t seen fit to make campaign finance reform one of its major issues. And the Establishment Republicans who are surfing the tea party wave—while at the same time scheming to co-opt the movement—would view the idea of taking money out of politics with horror, if they thought it might actually happen.

So who stole the government? What makes some people feel more disenfranchised now than they were, say, during the presidency of George W. Bush?

After all, it was Bush who inherited a budget surplus and left behind a suffocating deficit—I’m not being tendentious, just stating the facts. It was Bush who launched two wars without making any provision in the budget to pay for them, who proposed and won an expensive new prescription-drug entitlement without paying for it, who bailed out irresponsible Wall Street firms with the $700 billion TARP program.

Bush was vilified by critics while he was in office, but not with the suggestion that somehow the government had been seized or usurped—that it had fallen into hands that were not those of “the American people.” Yet this is the tea party suggestion about Obama.

Underlying all the tea party’s issues and complaints, it appears to me, is the entirely legitimate issue of the relationship between the individual and the federal government. But why would this concern about oppressive, intrusive government become so acute now? Why didn’t, say, government surveillance of domestic phone calls and e-mails get the constitutional fundamentalists all worked up?

I have to wonder what it is about Obama that provokes and sustains all this tea party ire. I wonder how he can be seen as “elitist,” when he grew up in modest circumstances—his mother was on food stamps for a time—and paid for his fancy-pants education with student loans. I wonder how people who genuinely cherish the American dream can look at a man who lived that dream and feel no connection, no empathy.

I ask myself what’s so different about Obama, and the answer is pretty obvious: He’s black. For whatever reason, I think this makes some people unsettled, anxious, even suspicious—witness the willingness of so many to believe absurd conspiracy theories about Obama’s birthplace, his religion, and even his absent father’s supposed Svengali-like influence from the grave.

Obama has made mistakes that rightly cost him political support. But I can’t help believing that the tea party’s rise was partly due to circumstances beyond his control—that he’s different from other presidents, and that the difference is his race.

Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.
   
© 2010, Washington Post Writers Group


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.

By Jessica, April 24, 2012 at 11:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

so, i think this is hilarious on one hand.But you also have to rleiaze that the Democrats are frequently incapable of turning off this disparaging snarkiness OUTSIDE of a comedy show and they come off as arrogant big-city jerks (insert a stronger word if you like). and that is what costs them elections each time. Ever hear the saying that Democrats elect wise-college professor types and Republicans do well with Frat-boy/Football captain types.  Obama (Bill Clinton, etc) speaks in long complex nuanced sentences.  Palin (Bush, and other Republicans) in comfortable speaking to 6 year olds. Speaks in simple sentences.

Report this

By pocenmary, November 14, 2010 at 11:32 am Link to this comment

Incidentally, Margaret Thatcher, once said; “Europe was created by history,
America was created by philosophy”. Well, is this the philosophy such
society refined should give to the macro society? If so, Gary Young sounds
realistic in one of his book, when he explained the nature of the disunited
America. If black is evil, can we remember that nature has its own way of
solving its problem. Xenophobia, i think should be discarded in its
ramifications in this century.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 9, 2010 at 1:51 am Link to this comment

mack894, November 9 at 4:49 am

We all have reasons for supporting each of the candidates and they all, sorry to say, are like hookers hanging out on a street corner. Each one has their own unique “specialty” and if your having to make your choice on the wrong street corner, it’s the lesser of a number of evils and you ultimately get ripped off , no matter which choice you make.

The flip side is a true courtesan who makes you feel blessed to help her with her, um, “expenses”. Either way, like lawyers or car salesmen, it’s a whore’s business, and in Washington, they’re not courtesans, they’re all whores.

You may still have some hope for Obama, but I had wondered about him when he wouldn’t commit himself to a position on NAFTA. Now, we KNEW NAFTA was a problem since Pappa-Bush so patronizingly tried to ram the New World Order down our throats. The man should be hung. What he was so sickeningly doing was trying to line up the population to give up the rights to their country.
Well, while he was doing his number, Clinton was hoping like hell that he’d be able to downplay his impeachment possibility. Rightly so, it was the last great juncture in US Consitutional procedure where the population could have forced the US debt back onto the banks that had caused it. It wasn’t just about Clinton and Monica and Whitewater. Well, so many people were asleep, and we blew it.

I’m not a Democrat (although I voted for Obama) nor a Republican, but it was the pathetric Libtards that shot the country in the foot by never questioning their fearless leader back then, 1999. Every administration since Carter (and as much as liked him as a person, even he made some very evil “presidential” decisions) has been knowingly sabotaging the viability of this country, along with their respective legislatures. ...... and these people took an oath, that is what is so despicable.

Obama? All he had to do was tell us the truth. That’s all. We all would have followed him to the ends of the Earth, even if he couldn’t meet all his campaign promises. But the man lied, just like Bush the Retard, Clinton, Pappa-Bush, and paranoid Reagan. They all lied.

If he decided to get down in a fireside chat and spill the beans to the populace, and just lay everything on the table, I still think the people would follow him (all citizenship issues aside), but he won’t do that because he’s working for the banks. Harry Truman drove back to his home in Missouri BY HIMSELF and WITHOUT any Secret Service, and Obama is doing this India junket, which will probably be the single most expensive presidential visit in history ...... at a time when the country can least afford to pay for it.

If you can still support Obama, you’re a better man than I. I just feel bad for this country. It’s sad what these people have done to their own homeland, all in the name on money. When men lose their integrity, they have nothing.

Report this
mack894's avatar

By mack894, November 8, 2010 at 11:49 pm Link to this comment

BR549—

Your post is one of the most excellent I’ve read on this site (or any
other) on the problems of our govt and nagging concerns about
the president that I’ve read over the past 2 years.

I, too, btw, had my concerns about the preisident and flip-flopped
between him and Edwards at one point, preferring Edwards’
directness about the rise of the corporatrocracy and the outrage
over poverty in this country.  Before you laugh, Edwards also
enjoyed support from Ralph Nader before he revealed himself a
fraud and committed narcissist. 

Of course, I’d never vote for McCain, so the choice was clear once
the president won the nomination…which is the point I’ve been
repeatedly making for years now—MONEY deprives us of choice
when it takes so much to run for office, money fueled by corporate
interests. Take money out of the equation by putting limits on
it…by doing so, it effectively repeals Citizen United. 

Yes, I had my qualms, too, about President Obama.  He didn’t get
my automatic vote (despite what some people want to believe
about how black people determine their choices).  But his platform
of issues appeared compatible with the progressive outlook and he
seemed committed to it.  In addition, his intelligence was a breath
of fresh air.  My worries return…often, as they did with Bill Clinton.
But I am willing to support him for his full term, perhaps for 2.  He
has some work to do, that’s for sure.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 5, 2010 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment

ChaviztaKing, November 5 at 7:25 am
“And we are victims of US government.”

Well, at least we agree on one thing.

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 5, 2010 at 3:25 am Link to this comment

BR: haha the people of FBI and CIA do not care about you and me, Chomsky, Alex Jones, Amy Goodman and most progressive socialist anti-corporate anti-war americans you know why? Because they only go after people who have a lot of fans around them.  They only would harass us, if we have a political party with millions of followers who would be an electoral threat to the 1 party dictatorship we have in America (Democrats and Republicans)

But you know something? i think that what USA needs a christian socialist front, because the “christian” label would attract a lot of good americans to that party.

And by the way anger, fighting, rage are normal human passions and emotions. Get angry, violent and agressive if you feel threatened.  And we are victims of US government.  And we should imitate Jesus Christ, the founder of socialism, we should love our enemies and do good to those that insult us


.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 5, 2010 at 2:54 am Link to this comment

ChaviztaKing, November 5 at 5:59 am
“How good it would be if all Tea Party supporters and all Republican Party supporters and voters all of a sudden leave the Tea Party and Republican Party and join the Socialist Party of USA or The Green Party, but americans are too psychorigid, too hard-headed, and not flexible enough, people who are born fan of the NY Yankees will die as Yankee fans.”

There is nothing wrong with ANY party except the human avarice that professional politicians seem to so easily embrace, and no amount of socialism will change that. True Republican ideals are as beneficial as true Democrat or Libertarian ideals. As long as those governing remember why they are in office and maintain integrity, ANY form of government will work, but take integrity out of the equation and NONE of them will work; it’s just a matter of time before they all go down.

And when the corruption eventually creeps into that socialist party of yours (and it’s only a matter of time), we’ll be no better off than any of the myriad of other socialist countries that have failed as well. In order for any country to be able to “survive”, it would probably have a better chance if it had nothing that the Rothschilds or the Rockefellers coveted, but once any country becomes a target for power or resources, you can kiss its ass goodbye. That’s what corruption does and it makes no difference what the form of government is.

The flip side is where a ruling body still has enough of a connection with the population it claims to govern so that it would try to empower rather than disempower them; THAT is the true test of governance; being willing to turn over the power to someone else rather than hoarding it. Anything else is bullshit, smoke, and mirrors. But go ahead and keep railing from your peach crate about your SOCIALIST party. That too will last about as long as the Sponge Bob Square Pants Party. Meanwhile, David Rockefeller would have taken his 55 gallon drums of Vaseline and porked everyone in sight and you’d be back to square one ....... or is that Square Pants?

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 5, 2010 at 1:59 am Link to this comment

How good it would be if all Tea Party supporters and all Republican Party supporters and voters all of a sudden leave the Tea Party and Republican Party and join the Socialist Party of USA or The Green Party, but americans are too psychorigid, too hard-headed, and not flexible enough, people who are born fan of the NY Yankees will die as Yankee fans

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 4, 2010 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment

Steve E, November 5 at 12:10 am

To further elaborate my point, had Obama attempted to investigate the legitimacy
of the Patriot Act and investigate 9/11, it would have given the legislature a
chance to root out who was still supporting the P/A and who would have been
willing to change their stance on it. Why are we not surprised that it’s repeal
continues to be stonewalled and why no “real” investigation has happened? The
issue of military grade thermite has travelled around the world, yet our legislature
continues with its “Hear No Evil” posture.

Report this

By Steve E, November 4, 2010 at 8:10 pm Link to this comment

BR549 Excellent post.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 4, 2010 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

FearNotTruth and GRYM,

I agree. I think too many people fell for the notion that just because Obama was talking about being progressive, that he actually meant he supported what he was talking about. What a novel concept.

The single largest vehicle standing in the way of the people regaining control of THEIR government is, in fact, the Patriot Act. Has anyone actually ever tried to read it? I have, and I can tell you that, as others have stated elsewhere, the legal and legislative referencing that was required to pull that off took nearly a decade to accurately perform. Pick any portion at random, just for jollies, but check it out. There was just NO WAY that the P/A was drafted as a result of 9/11; another issue that needs to be properly investigated for once. To have this “document” literally dumped onto a sickeningly naive legislature at the last minute was a crime in itself, except that when Obama got in office, he did absolutely NOTHING to address that monstrosity brought forth from the Wolfowitz Plan/PNAC Documents; NOTHING.

I had my doubts about Obama when he repeatedly refused to state his position on NAFTA, but I could not vote for McCain/Palin, sorry to say, as much of a long ago Republican I had been. I just couldn’t do it. I would have chosen the far fiscally wiser Ron Paul, but the MSM made sure that his stance on NAFTA would not be heard, thus he and EVERY OTHER NAFTA OPPOSER were summarily escorted off the debate stage. At the last minute, I voted for Obama, thinking that this guy couldn’t be lying THAT much to SO MANY people. Boy, was I wrong. And, well, here we are.

Whoever assumed the POTUS office in 2008, their first job should have been to investigate 9/11, educate the population, at least ATTEMPT to repeal the Patriot Act, and then we could have started getting back on the track, but Barry had other machinations in mind and has been continually sucker-punching his decreasing support base. Instead of addressing the abuses of the NSA, the TSA, the CIA, (and while we’re at it, the FDA and the AMA) and those renegade members of law enforcement that have already proven themselves to be part of the PROBLEM, the integrity of this country is just headed further into the toilet ...... the fish rots from the head down.

As a veteran, I am appalled how people who have never served have so contorted this country, and like so many others, I have had to watch how people in power have abused their their positions to further their own ends. This has nothing to do with partisan politics; it’s rampant on both sides of the aisle. Deliriously myopic apologists like Eugene Robinson and Huffington’s Bob Cesca are lost causes; their eyes are still glazed over from election night, 2008, still trying to support the stances they had taken during the campaigns.

If I were a cartoonist, I’d depict those two self appointed journalists as two old codgers bent over their canes trying to kick a dead horse named Hope and Change; how appropriate.

Report this

By firefly, November 4, 2010 at 7:22 pm Link to this comment

When Bush was president, the Republicans almost made it
a crime to speak disparagingly about the American
President. It was ‘unpatriotic’ and ‘unAmerican’.

That belief died quickly when Obama became president
didn’t it?

Report this
fearnotruth's avatar

By fearnotruth, November 4, 2010 at 5:03 pm Link to this comment

RE: ...people in or near the Obama administration -from Andy Stern to Secretary of
State, Clinton- refer to themselves as “progressive” people see a “progressive agenda”.


It matters none what you and I believe progressiveness is.  What matters is that not a single
piece of legislation, proposed or passed over the previous 21 months, has enjoyed the
support of the majority.  Not even one.


ABSOLUTLEY - we are in 100% agreement - the administration claims to be
“progressive” - the POTUS even chastised Wall Street in a Cooper Union address earlier this
year; BUT, what does he do?


From the day he came in off the campaign trail in 2008 to rally
his party to support the TARP, he has given Wall Street and City of London everything they
want. And, he has given the insurance companies a deal that’s even sweeter than the
monopoly they already enjoy. No wonder not a single piece of legislation, proposed or
passed over the previous 21 months, has enjoyed the support of the majority.  Not even
one.


The POTUS is a faux populist, installed to run Left Cover for the Globalists’ agenda.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 4, 2010 at 9:37 am Link to this comment

glider, - “What “Progressive Agenda” was there to say “No” to?”

-

Whether we agree with it or not; when the President of the United States and the Speaker of the House talk of the redistribution of wealth, individuals making over $250,000 a year are bad, energy is to be capped and traded rather than produced, green jobs means massive subsidies to friendly progressive enterprises, how the U.S. Supreme Court needs to work toward “redistributive change”, people in or near the Obama administration -from Andy Stern to Secretary of State, Clinton- refer to themselves as “progressive” people see a “progressive agenda”.

It matters none what you and I believe progressiveness is.  What matters is that not a single piece of legislation, proposed or passed over the previous 21 months, has enjoyed the support of the majority.  Not even one.

Report this
RayLan's avatar

By RayLan, November 4, 2010 at 8:50 am Link to this comment

That the right has disseminated malicious and racist distortions is not as disturbing as the fact that they worked. Shame on those Americans who bought into them but the slam against the Dems is about desperation and visceral anger, not racism. That might have been the case at one time - now everything and I mean everything is about the economy which has been blamed on Obama - so the anger is not just desperate but stupidly misdirected.

Report this

By ardee, November 4, 2010 at 5:47 am Link to this comment

rico, suave, November 3 at 12:45 pm Link to this comment

ardee:

“Victory is not an assurance of correctness.”

Careful ardee. That gate swings both ways.

As a proponent of third party politics I offer the question; wouldn’t that necessitate the gate swinging three ways?

I always appreciate a response, but would hope said reply would be a considered and thoughtful one.

Report this

By ardee, November 4, 2010 at 5:43 am Link to this comment

James M. Martin, November 3 at 10:33 pm Link to this comment

I never thought that much about that Obama-as-cadaver poster previously but I began to stare at it as I read your story.

Errr, the Joker character as portrayed so brilliantly in the last Batman movie by the now departed Heath Ledger…..Didnt the lipstick give you any clue? How many cadavers wear such?

Report this

By glider, November 4, 2010 at 12:39 am Link to this comment

GRYM,
What “Progressive Agenda” was there to say “No” to?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 3, 2010 at 11:34 pm Link to this comment

ChaviztaKing, November 4 at 1:14 am
“WE NEED TO BE REAL AGRESSIVE AND VIOLENT”

You know, junior, you have no understanding of the human mind and what its needs are. You just have this hair across your ass and you want to make sure that everyone knows about it. Either that or you’re a plant from within the FBI who are just looking for pimples to pop.

Taking to the streets is the LAST option for any group, not the first, and right now the biggest problem is who is going to be your first target; some lady in a wheel chair, the grocer down the street, or the little boy playing in the park? And what of collateral damage during the time you are letting off all this steam you have pent up?

I suggest you do some more reading and learn why exactly Marxism and Leninism ultimately failed before you go charging off to do whatever you’re planning. With thinking like that, I can guaranty whatever form of government you come up with will only be worse than what you were trying to overthrow.

Report this
mack894's avatar

By mack894, November 3, 2010 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment

Well, Eugene Robinson.  This is one of the few, direct, unapolegetic,
unequivocal articles you’ve written in the past year or so.  The right has gotten
away with painting the president as some exotic, possibly radical Muslim,
foreign socialist who is fundamentally unAmerican…because he is black.  But
not wanting to stir up images of the Ku Klux Klan, they avoided talking about
his color and resorted to the age old practice of “code talking,”—a code that
was broken centuries ago and so simple that a newborn can read it. 

The tea party started out as older white people who were paid by insurance
companies to attend town meetings and yell and holler about a sinister govt
run health care system that would threaten Medicare—another govt run health
care system.  Making sense was never necessary in the rise of the tea party—
just emotional outrage that some black guy with a Kenyan father, an Islamic
name, and from Hawaii could actually be the leader of the country. 

I listened to them everyday on my commute to work—the right wing radio
station here in Tennessee.  The guest house representative who’d come on and
say outright that Obama’s proposed tax cuts for the middle class were in
actuality reparations for black people, and that not even the white people
working for him realized this.  People believed this.

I just wish the president had sometimes called this people out for the stupid
nut jobs they are.  I just wish the president had listened to people other than
those silly advisers who always advise him to say nothing, to talk to no one,
including the wave of people who put him there.  I admire the president’s
civility, but the right is playing dirty and we seem to be allowing them to get
away with their dangerous silliness—a party who is all about defending
corporate interests, banking profits over the interests of people, including all
who post here no matter whether you’re right or left. 

Pres Obama still has the opportunity to get it…and an inclination, I’m hoping.
There is no such inclination on the right—they’re just waiting from another
paycheck from their friendly lobbyist.

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 3, 2010 at 11:08 pm Link to this comment

DEAR FRIENDS: I HAVE AN IDEA: INSTEAD OF COMPLAINING AND SPENDING SO MUCH PHYSICAL, EMOTIONAL, SPIRITUAL, AND MENTAL ENERGIES ON COMPLAINING.  It is time to move from the paradigm of *critical thinking* and complaining, to a paradigm of theory of revolution which is based on political-activism and organizing. But for that people need to forget about the Democrat Party, The Republican Party and The Tea Party (3 capitalist parties)

Here is a good article about organizing in the internet era:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/11/02-10

The results of this Internet-aided organizing have been significant. Nace states, “By late 2009, following two years of intense mobilization, opponents had derailed at least 109 proposed plants, bringing the coal boom to a sputtering halt.”

At the same time that I find it exasperating to read a lot of high-tech boosters—especially those with roots in marketing and business management—spread hype about the world-shattering implications of the Internet for social change, I am genuinely excited to see savvy organizers get their hands on new tools and new technologies and come up with innovative campaigns. I look forward to profiling more of those in the future.

As a last thought, I believe Jamie McClelland, one of the tech whizzes over at the May First/PeopleLink collective, makes an interesting suggestion when he argues that the Internet is not merely a medium for activism, but that it is important enough that it should simultaneously be a subject for organizing. He supports shifting from the question of how we “should use the tools of the Internet” to a debate about questions like “what is our role in the development of Internet?” and “how do we support and develop the revolutionary potential in the Internet” in the face of efforts by corporations and governments to control and monitor how we operate on this new digital terrain?

It is a fair concern, and I hope that—as much as high technology—the tried and tested art of person-to-person organizing will be brought to bear in addressing it.


.

Report this
fearnotruth's avatar

By fearnotruth, November 3, 2010 at 9:46 pm Link to this comment

RE: ...Obama himself benefited from the same financing to the tune of $700 million to
win office?  It seems to me any reform effects Washington in it’s entirety. Choosing sides
on the issue seems, well, not productive with our time?


ABSOLUTELY and exactly why Socialism charges are nonsense - he’s a Wall St.
puppet, just like his predecessor


only solution, all money out!
regardless of the infamous Supreme Court ruling; money does not equal speech


Amend the Constitution:


1. zero donations - make all money other than salaries illegal
2. zero paid advertising - make all paid advertising illegal
3. make all media platforms equally free on/about/for-and-against all candidates and
referenda positions as a legal requisite for holding license to use public airwaves and 4th
estate privileges


as for advertising vs. free speech…
of course the right to publish virtually anything (excepting liable and privacy violations for
which there are legal remedies) about anyone is constitutionally protected - but, in the
case of anyone standing for public office, or any referenda issues, anything ever published
or broadcast about them should require full disclosure as to the publication’s funding

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2010 at 9:27 pm Link to this comment

Yeah, GRYM, you are right. We are probably going to suffer for another 10 years under the same guys who drove the bus over the cliff from 1994 to 2008.  Then, when EVERYBODY but the Koch Bros, and the CEOs of corporations based outside the US is broke, and our “century” is an ancient memory, we’ll start rebuilding the USA.  Or we’ll be in for centuries of the next “Dark Ages”.

Remember: 22% of Americans describe themselves as being in the top 1% of income earners!  Delusion is whole-sale.

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 3, 2010 at 9:14 pm Link to this comment

BR549: SORRY BUT THE POOR UNITED STATES IS ANGRY AND WILL CRUSH COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARIES, WE NEED TO BE REAL AGRESSIVE AND VIOLENT !!  ANTI-CHANGE PROGRESSIVE-LIBERALS CAN GET ON THE UNITED STATES OF THE REPUBLICAN ASSHOLES, DEMOCRAT ASSHOLES AND PROGRESSIVE ANTI-CHANGE ASSHOLES

THANX


.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 3, 2010 at 9:08 pm Link to this comment

ChaviztaKing, November 4 at 12:56 am
“That United States needs to unite into a Marxist-Leninist Socialist United Front
with a lot of anger, and rage willing to overthrow the United States of The
Republican Party who killed JFK, Luther King and needs to be overthrown and
repressed under a revolutionary socialist dictatorship.”

Dude, get real. Are you working for George Soros or Rockefeller? The people of
the United States just need to unite and to remember that the problems we are
having with elections and our legislature are due to corruption, not political
ideologies. We could have a very effective Democrat or Republican run
government, but not even socialism will work under corruption.

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 3, 2010 at 8:56 pm Link to this comment

DEAR SOCIALIST BROTHERS IN CHRIST, MARX, HUGO CHAVEZ AND CHIEF SITTING BULL WHO CARE ABOUT PEOPLE EATING FROM FOOD BANKS, SHOPPING FROM THRIFTY STORES AND POORESTS OF AMERICA LIKE THE UNDOCUMENTED ILLEGAL CITIZENS, THE HOMELESS, THE AMERICAN INDIANS, THE POORS AND THE PRISONERS WHO SHOULD ALL BE FREE OUT OF JAILS.

http://www.masspartyoflabor.org/

Obama and Republicans only care about the rich upper classes (About those yuppies and ‘haves’ you see driving Volvos, Lexus shiny SUVs). What we the poor need is a United Socialist Front which would install a revolutionary socialist dictatorship (temporarily) with a red-terror police dictatorship expropiating the wealth, and corporations of those yuppies you see eating at Olive Garden, Red Lobster, shopping at Sears, JC Penney and Luxury 5 star restaurants.

Those Republican Party self absorved assholes you see shopping at Target, Sams stores, Best Buy Stores, eating at Charlies Restaurants, and living the life of their time, and the time of their lives do not care about the other United States.  The United States that buys clothes from Thrifty Stores, and who eat from Food Banks. 

That United States needs to unite into a Marxist-Leninist Socialist United Front with a lot of anger, and rage willing to overthrow the United States of The Republican Party who killed JFK, Luther King and needs to be overthrown and repressed under a revolutionary socialist dictatorship.

.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 8:39 pm Link to this comment

ITW, - “Crow as much as you like, GRYM.”

-

O.K.

Yesterday saw an historic 24 pt. split amongst independents AWAY from your position.  Precisely as you were told for over a year would happen if you and yours kept up your needless attacks against those whom actually decide elections.  You refused to hear it.  Did you hear it yesterday from coast to coast?  From Alaska to Hawaii? 

Due to new reapportionment rules it’s unlikely democrats can regain the House until 2020.  Did I not warn you dozens of times this would happen? Did I not warn you that what you and yours were doing would have the opposite desired effect?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 6:57 pm Link to this comment

kerryrose, - “Well, the really nutty ones didn’t win… Angle, O’Donnell, the Nazi guy, and probably the fascist in Alaska.”

-

A positive testament to the American people as a whole, yes?  Although I’m not sure I agree with you on the “Nazi guy”. 

-

Returning to corporate monies in elections.  Why should we condemn republican/corporate campaign financing knowing so well that President Obama himself benefited from the same financing to the tune of $700 million to win office?  It seems to me any reform effects Washington in it’s entirety.

Choosing sides on the issue seems, well, not productive with our time?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 3, 2010 at 6:44 pm Link to this comment

kerryrose, November 3 at 9:01 pm
“Well, the really nutty ones didn’t win… Angle, O’Donnell, the Nazi guy, and
probably the fascist in Alaska.”

I’ll agree that O’Donnell was one step short of living in the Twilight Zone, but
Sharron Angle? You’d rather keep the corruption machine running, I suppose. And
San Franciscans must have been on dope to have elected Pelosi back in.

Report this
James M. Martin's avatar

By James M. Martin, November 3, 2010 at 6:33 pm Link to this comment

I never thought that much about that Obama-as-cadaver poster previously but I began to stare at it as I read your story.  It suddenly dawned on me that by depicting Obama as a cross between a clown and a corpse, and by showing him with lip-to-ear deer knife slashings, the Right Wingnut propaganda machine was hard at it.  The suggestion is: go ahead and kill him, he’s pushing socialism.  These people are not Americans, they are fascists.  The war of ideas we thought ended in Europe in the Forties is seeing its reincarnation in America in the first decade of the 21st century, and every indication is, it will get a lot worse.

Report this
kerryrose's avatar

By kerryrose, November 3, 2010 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment

GRYM

Well, the really nutty ones didn’t win… Angle, O’Donnell, the Nazi guy, and probably the fascist in Alaska.

Report this

By Salome, November 3, 2010 at 4:37 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Thanks, adc14, for saying so well what I think.  Obama brought this election debacle upon himself.  And I’m sorry to see that he’s trying to explain it away by saying that his administration didn’t communicate well.  No, what happened is that Obama diddled with the Republicans so long, Kennedy died, and Obama’s signature legislation ended up as no universal health care, no public option, no health care reform at all, only a health insurance tweak.  Apparently, Obama can’t admit that, he’d rather claim it was a failure to communicate.
Obama not only gave his progressive base the finger, he conspicuously distanced himself from black America as well, and then was reduced to begging the same people:  “Don’t let ME down”.  Reality check, please!
Adc14 summed it up nicely:  “He dithered away a once in a lifetime to make real, substantive change…and stop the middle class descent to the basement.  He didn’t do it, and you can’t blame the Tea Party for that.”
Now, we’ll get to watch Obama warm the bench for two years until the corporatocracy takeover is complete.
A tradegy of Shakespearean proportions.

Report this

By Steve E, November 3, 2010 at 3:19 pm Link to this comment

Is Barry maybe certifiable considering his latest excuse, “We were in such a hurry
to get things done that we didn’t change how things got done.”? Nah, I’m sticking
with the adjective “stupid”. Race and color have nothing to do with this debacle.
This man is just plain incompetent and out of touch. God save us from the future
with this idiot and his deceitful ideas of bipartisanship and compromise. Fool me
once…

Report this
Lafayette's avatar

By Lafayette, November 3, 2010 at 12:48 pm Link to this comment

ABOUT THE TEA-PARTIERS

For these poor souls, time stopped in 1776.

“Nationalists” somehow think that our forebears would have defied the notion of Social Justice. At the time, both the French and the American revolutions were sparked by the same injustice—that of a monarchic aristocracy of landed-gentry whose domination of agriculture returned to them enormous riches.

Fast forward 234 years - Pray tell, how has anything changed? The top 1% of households posses 35% of total Net Worth, the next 19% (thus amounting to 20%) have obtained 50% of the Net Worth—leaving only 35% for the bottom 80% of American households. Or, put it another way: The top 1% of households obtain 43% of the Total Financial Wealth generated, whilst the next 19% have 50% of all Financial Wealth—leaving 7% for the bottom 80%. (Figures from bona fide research reported here).

Does anyone really ‘n truly think that our forebears would have been proud of those results—which are entirely contrary to the reasons for which they fought a rebellion to free themselves from an exploitative monarchy?

Do we need another rebellion to free ourselves from plutocrats that now rule America?
?
What is it about the Tea Party people whose history stops with the American revolution? Wake up ... a lot has transpired since. We’ve come a long way.

But given the mid-term results, evidently not nearly far enough.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, November 3, 2010 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

Gene, Gene, Gene, here we go yet again. You talk about your saviour Barry as if he were a gift from heaven that came down on this plane to bless us poor pathetic souls. Give us a break.

When you get off the Koolo-Aid you’ve been hammering, and maybe perhaps look at some real numbers, Bush did NOT inherit a surplus from the Clinton Administration. That was a myth, a fiscal slight of hand, and had you done any homework on this and gotten your head out of Barry’s and the Clintons’ butts, you might have seen that.

I am not a Republican and yes, I did vote for Barry, but I didn’t get so blinded by my race that I couldn’t see the forest through the trees. If your saviour made any attempt to follow through on his campaign promises, I would still be supporting him, but he hasn’t because he couldn’t. The strings which he is being controlled by would extend him that latitude. And even stretching the issue to suppose that he might have been naive enough to have believed in what he was preaching, why has he not made any attempt to educate the populace about the Constitution and why his plans are not able to be achieved? He can’t, because it would be counterproductive to transferring the wealth out of the middle class, which he knew all too well about while he was refusing to comment on his stance on NAFTA during his campaign. To blame this on recalcitrant sour-grapes Rebublicans is just an excuse.

So get off your lazy butt and start researching things a bit deeper, and when you are able to fire up some dormant journalistic skills, maybe then you might regain some of your lost readership.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 3, 2010 at 12:19 pm Link to this comment

GRYM and ITW:

One more word out of you two and I’m turning this car around!

Let’s talk about something else!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2010 at 12:13 pm Link to this comment

Crow as much as you like, GRYM.

I still don’t believe Americans REALLY know what they are in for with the Tea Party, or understand what it all means.  At least that’s my fervent hope.  I prefer to think my fellow citizens ignorant and intellectually lazy rather than morally demented (Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Joe Miller, Sharon Angell, and Christine O’Donnell all come to mind).

Impeach who? Why Nancy Pelosi and John Stewart of course, who did you think I meant, President Obama?  The Republicans would NEVER impeach a sitting President on a bullshit trumped-up premise, like he’s really a Kenyan, or he lied about cheating on his wife.  Would they?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 11:57 am Link to this comment

ITW, - “Of course you feel glee over the Teaparty wins.  You are THRILED that the GOP has the House, and that the Senate hold by the Dims is significantly weaker.”

-

Try to imagine individuals who don’t think and feel as you would.  Unlike your own reactions I am far from thrilled this day.  You make the lonely mistake of believing my defense of protesters is a support for their respective cause(s).  It is not.

-

When you see me twisting your, so-called, logic what you’re actually witnessing is me sounding back the things you write.  It’s interesting how you feel revulsion at your own logic, yes?

-

You have repeatedly opined that the Tea Protesters are nothing but a small group of insignificant loons and racists.  A small fringe of the larger racist republican party.  Boy, did you ever turn out to be wrong. - Tea Protesters effected almost every race across the nation this election cycle.  From school boards to City Councils to Governors - all the way to Washington. - You could not have been more wrong over the past year.  I did try numerous times to have you see what was right before your face.  You refused to even hear it.  - YOU helped to cause yesterday’s spank-fest.

_

I don’t follow the media as closely as you appear to.  I know nothing of a desire for impeachment.  Impeach who?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2010 at 10:49 am Link to this comment

GRYM:
Of course you feel glee over the Teaparty wins.  You are THRILED that the GOP has the House, and that the Senate hold by the Dims is significantly weaker.  I expect massive amounts of subpeonae, and investigations from Issa.  Bachmann has said Dem members of the House should be investigated for “disloyalty”, though last night, 3 times, she refused to answer Chris Matthews’ question about it.

I expect to see bills of Impeachment proposed before the Summer.

Report this
elfuncle's avatar

By elfuncle, November 3, 2010 at 10:45 am Link to this comment

The call to “return American government to the American people” —didn’t the Democrats say the same thing, or at least something very similar, when they were in opposition? “Again, who’s in possession of the government right now, if not the American people?” says Eugene Robinson. You don’t need a right winger to give you a negative response to that. Ask Noam Chomsky or Chris Hedges. How naive can you get? Are the people really in possession of the government? When did that happen?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2010 at 10:30 am Link to this comment

GRYM:

I guess you think I said somewhere that the Teaparty couldn’t win. If so you have a better memory than I do because I don’t think I ever said such a thing.

But that’s OK. You invent stuff you want to think I said and then it becomes your “truth”.

I DID say they SHOULDN’T be elected—but many were.  I’ve also predicted that they will NOT work with the Republican leadership unless those leaders bend to their Taliban-like policies—and they will.

I simply do not see how their being elected due to gazillions of attack ads by the Kochs and the US Chamber of Commerce proves that a) The TeaParty is right or b) they aren’t racist.

But then, again, I can never follow your strange excuse for “logic”.

One thing you are right about: Harry Reid. I’ve said the same damn thing about him many times, and even in this thread.  I’ve been nauseated by him since he became Maj leader in 2006. I STILL don’t believe the Senate Caucus made him their leader, and, like lemmings ALREADY over a cliff, will probably keep him as their leader.

Report this

By tedmurphy41, November 3, 2010 at 10:09 am Link to this comment

Well, race can, if allowed to, be devisive by these unhealthy applications. With the KKK, you knew who you were up against and could make provision to combat it, but this particular method used is so deviously underhand and secret that, although you know it to be there, it cannot be pinned down.
The only obvious answer is to avoid these parties which are suspected of operating an agenda that encourages such behaviour.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 3, 2010 at 10:06 am Link to this comment

As for race and the Tea Party- Two words

Alan West.

I can’t wait for the prog-lib bigots to try to explain him away.

Report this

By BBFmail, November 3, 2010 at 9:50 am Link to this comment

HUmmmmm…So Robinson, like so many Obamalovers…is playing the race card.  Pathetic!

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 9:02 am Link to this comment

rico,

-

I feel no sense of glee over yesterday’s results.  I do, however, admit to a slight sense of glee on how completely correct I was about the mistakes ITW and others have made in regards to the Tea Party. - For over a year I’ve warned ITW that this would happen.  For over a year he and others on TruthDig have made it clear how wrong I was.

-

I’ve warned everyone here numerous times how unapologetic hatred and vile barbs would return to bite them.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 3, 2010 at 8:50 am Link to this comment

GRYM:

Lighten up on the glee. After all we’re guests here at truthdig (although most here would rather see a turd in the punchbowl). Inherit The Wind is generally calm if not entirely persuasive, so allow him to vent for a while then we can get back to arguing. After all, he is right about one thing- nothing will change in DC except the rhetoric.

Report this

By glider, November 3, 2010 at 8:46 am Link to this comment

I like the Joker caricature of Obama, but it should be captioned “Corporatist”.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 3, 2010 at 8:45 am Link to this comment

ardee:

“Victory is not an assurance of correctness.”

Careful ardee. That gate swings both ways.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 8:36 am Link to this comment

andrushka,

-

You’ve missed the point on republicans.  The “Party of No” is the party that just won major races in Governorships and the House and Senate.

-

It’s important to keep in mind that not one piece of major legislation, proposed or passed over the last 20 months, enjoyed the support of the majority of Americans. - In other words; the “Party of No” has, today, resoundingly won this election.  The majority has repeatedly said NO to a Progressive agenda.

Report this

By andrushka, November 3, 2010 at 8:06 am Link to this comment

I am white, European having lived in the States for quite a number of years, and follow closely American politics.  From all the posts here, those that have for me a strong ring of truth is that of Inherit the Wind. I remember, that the minute Obama won in November 2008, the Republicans decied that they were going to oppose EVERY plan of Obama.  I have the strong impression they NEVER digested their loss.

Report this

By ardee, November 3, 2010 at 7:58 am Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man, November 3 at 11:09 am

Clearly you have been wrong about the Tea Party over the last 19 months.  Disastrously wrong, in fact! Just as wrong as you were about Bush/Cheney calling off the 08 elections (that was simply stupid)

-

I’m not an “I Told You So” type of person, however, I’ve told you for more than a year how much of a mistake you were making in demonizing the Tea Party.

Victory is not an assurance of correctness. Your increasingly pompous and arrogant rants here put you in the same boat as the person you defame. Because the GOP won a mid term election, even one as impressive in its gains as this one, is not an endorsement of Tea Party intellect. In fact, given the statements of most of them, Tea Party intelligence is an oxymoron.

Democratic incompetence and cowardice, Republican intractibility and refusal to do their jobs in favor of regaining power by bringing our government to a grinding halt contributed. As did a desperately declining economy, millions of foreclosures, even more millions of lost jobs, legacies of Bush every one, all contributed to the results.

Crow now, eat crow in two years. The goal is still the same, yours is ego building, sad to note, ours should be the rescuing of our nation from greed and the increasing stupidity of the governing.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

ITW,

Wish to grasp what you helped to cause?  Ohio is THE most significant single state in the nation during presidential elections.  Kasich and Portman trounced their democratic opponents.  And Portman was a Bush administration official!!

-

You helped to cause this sea change.  Feel all better today?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 7:09 am Link to this comment

ITW,

“And will Reid and Pelosi back him (Obama)?”

-

LOL….Pelosi is out of a job!  Reid was nearly defeated by a total nut-job.  Only GARGANTUAN SUMS OF MONEY and RESOURCES saved Reid’s azz.

-

Reid, already one of the weakest Senate Majority leaders in recent history, has been rendered almost useless to Obama.

-

Clearly you have been wrong about the Tea Party over the last 19 months.  Disastrously wrong, in fact! Just as wrong as you were about Bush/Cheney calling off the 08 elections (that was simply stupid)

-

I’m not an “I Told You So” type of person, however, I’ve told you for more than a year how much of a mistake you were making in demonizing the Tea Party.  YOU helped cause yesterday’s election results.  I hope you’re proud of yourself today.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 3, 2010 at 6:37 am Link to this comment

No more excuses.  Now Boehner can’t sit on his ass and say “No!”. McConnell can’t sit on his ass and say “No!”

Now they HAVE to deliver:

Lower taxes and a balanced budget.  Go ahead, try.

If the Bush tax cuts are renewed, just the portion on the wealthiest 5% will cause a $700 billion INCREASE in the deficit.  Rep. Cantor, the whip, bragged last night that his party has proposed $350 Billion in spending cuts…that means the GOP is STILL going to increase the deficit by $350 billion.

Simple math ($700b) - $350b = ($350b). 

So what else you gonna cut? Military? Nope. SocSec? Nope. Medicare? Nope.  In fact, the major portions of the budget that cause the deficit will NOT be touched by the GOP just like they weren’t by the Dems.

But they will cut their throats and ours by cutting every infrastructure project.

Now comes the Trillion Dollar Question: Will Obama have the guts to face them down when they propose insane shit?  And will Reid and Pelosi back him?

More importantly, will the Dims in the Senate FINALLY get it through their thick heads that Reid is not only an atrocious leader, he’s ALWAYS vulnerable and they need someone who CANNOT be challenged, someone from a solid Blue state like Schumer or even Kerry?  I doubt it.

I wonder why I even bother. For 30 years I’ve watched the glacial drift toward a feudal, fascist 3rd World society.  We hold it back, roll it back, then we move toward it again, ponderously, but inevitably.  Each day we come closer to the right wing Christian Taliban…and yesterday we moved closer yet again.

How can we stop it?  Between the dim-witted Democratic leadership, and the pie-in-the-sky unreal “progressives” like Ralph Nader and Chris Hedges, where will strong, yet realistic leadership come from?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 3, 2010 at 6:31 am Link to this comment

garard,

According to yesterday’s exit polls just over 40% of ALL Americans (hundreds of millions) support the Tea Party. - Moderates, independents and conservatives (20% of Americans identify themselves as liberal).

-

According to a recent NYT/MSNBC poll 68% of Tea Party supporters are college graduates.  Contrast that with 36% of likely democratic voters.

-

According to the latest PEW poll roughly 8% of the American public believe the Tea Party is a racist movement.  92% do not.

-

You see how it is you whom make up the less educated, less tolerant, minority in America?

-

And if you believe the Tea Party is largely made up of racists you’ll have to prove it.  So far no one has has been able to do that beyond their FEELINGS and bigoted PERCEPTIONS. 

-

Good luck.

Report this

By lichen, November 3, 2010 at 1:12 am Link to this comment

Obama is a war criminal and should be prosecuted; so are the clintons and bush’s.  Obama is not legitimate; he is corporatist war criminal plutocratic scum; so are the tea partiers.  They all need to go, in favor of the people’s real democracy.

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 3, 2010 at 1:03 am Link to this comment

BE LIKE JESUS CHRIST (THE FOUNDER OF SOCIALISM) LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, DO GOOD TO THOSE THAT INSULT YOU. LOVE BUSH, GLENN BECK, AND SARAH PALIN

Report this

By c.d.embrey, November 3, 2010 at 12:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Tea Party rank and file want to take the Government back from Wall St.
Many of the TPPeople dislike Obama for the same reason that Progressives
dislike him ... he’ Wall Streets Buttboy!

What they don’t understand is that turning the government of to the
Republicans will make the things ten times worse for them. Teapartiers
were heard chanting “leave your hands off of my Medicare.” The people
that they just voted into office will do their best to end both Medicare and
Social Security - the law of unintended consequences at work.

As a Progressive I’m glad to see the “right of center Democrats implode.”

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 3, 2010 at 12:49 am Link to this comment

We have 2 options in USA for 2012 elections: Green Party or Sarah Palin.  I say Green Party coz Democrat Party sucks at destroying the right-wingers. What did Obama do? Instead of destroying the power of the right like Hugo Chavez is doing in Venezuela by nationalizing corporations, closing capitalist TV stations and locking in jail capitalists, he puts them in the damn White House Cabinet

Report this
ChaviztaKing's avatar

By ChaviztaKing, November 3, 2010 at 12:40 am Link to this comment

http://www.masspartyoflabor.org/ <—DONT VOTE IN THESE ELECTIONS. Obama and Republicans only care about the rich upper classes (About those yuppies and ‘haves’ you see driving Volvos, Lexus shiny SUVs).  What we the poor need is a United Socialist Front which would install a revolutionary socialist dictatorship (temporarily) with a red-terror police dictatorship expropiating the asses of those yuppies you see eating at Olive Garden

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 11:16 pm Link to this comment

GOD, this website is going to be fun from now on!!!!

Report this

By gerard, November 2, 2010 at 11:05 pm Link to this comment

GRYM:  You can’t know how sincerely I hope that it was (is) “a monumental mistake in labeling independent Tea Protesters as racist, stupid and dangerous.”  Sadly, I fear the Tea Party is NOT independent, but is a riled-up collection of disgruntled reactionaries with unexpected access to lots of money to spend on winning this election. 
  I also think they are more or less “racist”(as are lots of other Americans, sad to say)  though the degree of their racism remains to come to the full light of day.  As of yet it’s a suspicion that is more likely to turn out to be true than not. Time will tell.
  Dangerous, yes, because they follow the directions of a rabble-rouser and political operatives who are not the least bit interested in anything except their “yes” vote. The “baggers” are naive, not malicious—undereducated, not stupid—and nay be a bit too quick on the draw, if you catch my meaning.
  What we need—and do not have—is an organization of wise, broad-minded, experienced people from the lower middle class who can think of ways to stop wars, spend money on jobs, health care, education and justice for all the people (rich and poor and in between, white, black and purple) and help bring this country back to some balanced common sense. 
  It is not right or sustainable when 2% of the population controls business opportunity and government and deprives millions of people of all chance for healthy, happy lives. It won’t last.  It can’t last, no matter how many Congress people are elected from the right wing point of view.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 10:39 pm Link to this comment

ITW,

I still can’t help but wonder where your sense of outrage was when people on TruthDig were writing how President Bush murdered Ten Thousand black people in Louisiana?  Did you label this entire thread as Moon-Bats and dangerous racists like you do Tea Protesters?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 10:34 pm Link to this comment

ITW,

In your last post you display the angry style you have possessed over the past 18 to 20 months. 

As you state; you see a BLACK MAN in white face while most see nothing more than the opposition “criminalizing” or “degrading” the U.S. President in the Joker character.  IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER as the previous president had been depicted.  Color, as you write, makes all the difference.  To you.

The Black Man as President is always on your mind.  Not unlike Eugene Robinson and a small few other bigots and racists.

What you do is dangerous.  Why not simply end it?

-

How do you feel today after minimizing and marginalizing the Tea Party for the last 19-20 months?  You have always written of the crowd as rudderless and insignificant.  Yet these people have influenced THE ENTIRE elections cycle. - Will you be writing how wrong you’ve been any time soon? 

I’ve illustrated to you, for at least the last year, how you and others engage in a monumental mistake in labeling independent Tea Protesters as racist, stupid and dangerous.  Those independents just decided some significant changes in seats and dialog all across your country.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 2, 2010 at 9:44 pm Link to this comment

GRYM:

Stop with your childish bully-on-the-playground games already.

Stop with your lies, your misrepresentations, and your leading questions.

A White man portrayed in Whiteface is as different from Black man portrayed in Whiteface as a Black man calling another Black man “Nigga” and a White man calling a Black man “Nigger”.

And you KNOW IT! So please, for once, stop the obfuscations, the red herrings, and the lies.

Next you’ll claim that portraying Obama barefoot in overalls, eating watermelon isn’t racist either.

You are such a phony and you always have been.  Why don’t you go celebrate your Teaparty racist fanatic friends taking over the House? That way they can gut every sensible regulation on banking, on Wall Street, on creating clean energy, on pollution and on government intrusion into our personal lives. It’s what you want. It’s what you advocate. It’s what you spend your free time fighting for here.

Now go enjoy it.  But don’t come whining to me when you lose YOUR job and YOUR home and YOUR kids can’t afford college.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment

ITW,

So you believe “My Country Back” is as clearly racist as Vanity Fair’s depiction of George Bush as the Joker?  Is that what you want people to believe?

A simple and direct answer would be appreciated.

Report this

By gerard, November 2, 2010 at 8:31 pm Link to this comment

Before knocking it off for the day, one missing factor needs to be thrown into this endless argument:

“The racial and ethnic complexion of the American population changed more dramatically in the past decade than at any time in the 20th century, with nearly one in every four Americans claiming African, Asian, Hispanic or American Indian ancestry. The 1980 census found that one in five Americans had a minority background.”

Similar statements less objective have come out of polls for the last 30 years about how by such-and-such a year “whites” will be in a “minority.” When such statements are bruited about in the media there is always an uptick in fear and intolerance among whites. Such counts encourage whites toward fear and suggest the “take our country back” impulse.
  Without a lot of research I can’t set out just when, where and why, but I suggest that it’s no wonder the ugly phenomenon of prejudice recurs and recurs, especially since very little is done to counteract it. 
  When small efforts at the local level have an uphill battle on their hands. I well remember:  In Pittsburgh (forced by the need for labor in the mills to face questions of discrimination directly in the 20s) KKK burnt a cross on the hill in the nearby cemetary and all the neighbors cowered (many of them first generation from Europe.  Fast forward to the 60s.
  Civil Rights. Deliberately forming an “Interracial Club” of people willing to go regularly in small groups to visit and “sit-in” to protect Asians and/or African Americans who had recently bought houses nearby.  (No Middle easterners yet, but it’s the same story for them now.
  Especially when jobs are scarce, whites lacking enough education to resist, fall into the trap and feel like they are “losing their country.”(..which they long presumed to be “theirs” since they “got rid of” the Real Americans without even having to pay for the land yet! (viz.the struggles of Arizona and SoCal currently) Need any more historical evidence of race prejudice?
  Of course such figures as quoted above tend to encourage animosities and fears on all sides.  Divide and conquer and keep labor costs down.
  Solution:  Take the time and trouble to educate the fearful whites as children because after they are adults, it is most often too late.

Report this
fearnotruth's avatar

By fearnotruth, November 2, 2010 at 7:46 pm Link to this comment

RE: “...By Go Right Young Man, November 2 at 8:44 pm Link to this
comment
Rico, - “What specifically or even tangentially, have Stuart Jack, Tim Ridley,
Warren Coats and Richard Rahn either privately, singly, in concert, or officially,
in the name of the CIMA, done to “instigate the launch of wars”?
-
Precisely.

INDEED gate keepers from whom you’d never learn who’s who -
exactly the point - here’s a clue - Gutle Schnapper, wife of Mayer Amschel
Rothschild, was once quoted as saying—“If my sons did not want war, there
would be none” ... follow the money

Below is a list of the top 20 defense contractors, derived from the 2010 Top
100 list, based on their 2009 defense contract revenue.

Rank     Top Defense Companies
(follow links for complete company profiles)   
Defense Revenue
($ Millions - 2009)

1   Lockheed Martin Corp. 
$11,904

2   Northrop Grumman Corp. 
$9,324

3   Boeing Co. 
$8,189

4   Raytheon Co. 
$6,187

5   General Dynamics Corp. 
$4,730

6   KBR Inc. 
$4,545

7   Science Applications International Corp. 
$4,108

8   L-3 Communications Corp. 
$3,656

9   Computer Sciences Corp. 
$2,221

10   ITT Corp. 
$1,894

11   CACI International Inc. 
$1,690

12   BAE Systems Inc. 
$1,659

13   Hewlett-Packard Co. 
$1,589

14   Harris Corp. 
$1,330

15   United Technologies Corp. 
$1,320

16   URS Corp. 
$1,006

17   Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 
$1,005

18   DRS Technologies Inc. 
$994

18   Dell Computer Corp. 
$987

20   Rockwell Collins Inc. 
$912

Source: Washington Technology - 2010 Top 100

Report this
mrfreeze's avatar

By mrfreeze, November 2, 2010 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

rico,suave - Your questioin:

“You can’t remember the Reagan years? The Bush years???!! Are you serious???”

Yes, I remember those years well and I don’t remember there ever being the “coded messages,” or Bush being “black-faced” or outright “touretts syndrom-like” outbursts (liar, commie, “then n workd, etc.) by pundits, reporters and, yes, even members of congress at the most inappropriate times…....Oh, that’s right, nothing is inappropriate as long as it’s directed at our “socialist” leader. Nothing is off limits these days when it comes to Obama.

Your problem rico, is that you think the rest of us out here have been asleep whilst our country has been hijacked by the uber-hyper wealthy classes. They didn’t want no BOY running things. They want things to go back to when life was good and whitey ran the world.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 7:21 pm Link to this comment

Fat Freddy:

Ooooh Ouch! Great post.

Report this
Fat Freddy's avatar

By Fat Freddy, November 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm Link to this comment

Is The Google Broken at Washington Post HQ?

Direct response from Michael Moynihan, Reason.com.

Well, of course it goes without saying that a Republican candidate opposed to the agenda of the Democratic House, Senate, and presidency needn’t specify who controls the levers of government. But Eugene Robinson, racial codebreaker, sees something deeply sinister in this type of rhetoric and, I suspect, voter’s predicted repudiation of the Democratic Party.

Whoa, whoa. Doubtless Robinson would detect racial animus in my saying so—do I say such things about other columnists?—but to suggest that there is something unique about this type of language is either deeply dishonest or just plain dumb.

Is the Google broken at Washington Post headquarters? Because if Robinson wanted to test his theory that the silly, populist phrase “take back the government” (or, alternately, “take back America”) is some secret racist handshake, he could have poked around the Reason website and found this post, in which I attacked the Post’s Richard Cohen for making the same stupid argument.

http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/05/the-worst-column-of-the-year-c

Exit question for Robinson: Is President Obama a racist for speaking at the Take Back America conference in 2006, 2007, and 2008?

http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/02/is-the-google-broken-at-washin

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 6:12 pm Link to this comment

ITW:

Rubio is Cuban.

I wasn’t questioning why blacks support Democrats. I know why they do.

The Joker image was indeed unfortunate. And yet- it only highlights our hypersensitivity to race as an issue.

Where I live in North Carolina, there are almost as many Ukrainian and Russian immigrants as Hispanics.  Yet, I don’t see any Cyrilic signage at the local Home Depot. “English Only” is not “code” for them to get the hell out. “English Only” is code for “This is an English-speaking country. To succeed, you’d better master English.” No more, no less.

I’m sorry ITW, but you play the racism card too readily. There has to be something more going on.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 2, 2010 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment

Rico, my friend, you are living in a fool’s paradise.

LOTS of people pretend Fox is Fair and Balanced—it’s the only way to justify it as a source of news.  However, I’m glad YOU realize it is what it is.

Rubio is, as far as I know, an Italian name.  Last I checked, most Italian-Americans were White.  Sorry…

So why DO Blacks support Democrats?  Isn’t the answer obvious?  All the old White Southern racists who used to be Dixiecrat-Democrats are now Republicans.  Every program designed to help non-white minorities achieve a modicum of parity with Whites is called (in derogatory tones) “Affirmative Action” and ALWAYS described as a preference system where “unqualified minorities” are selected and placed over “qualified White candidates”...doesn’t matter if it’s true or only partially true—that’s the “mantra”.  So….would YOU vote for people who seem overly hostile to you solely for being Black?  I KNOW you don’t think Blacks are stupid.  They are voting to their own, best advantage.

Or how about this?  In 2000 and 2004, President Bush got a very healthy percentage of Hispanic votes.  Why? Because on many of the so-called “value issues”, many Hispanics are very conservative.  Yet in the 2006 and 2008 elections that support from Hispanics has melted like a kid’s snow cone dropped on a hot sidewalk.  All due to one word: “Immigration”, or more clearly “Illegal immigrants”. 

You may actually have valid arguments for many restrictions, but “Illegal Immigrants” is like “English Only”—a code word for anti-Hispanic racism.  You can argue it’s not. But that’s why Hispanics who OTHERWISE would be loyal Republicans, are voting Democrat—they smell the racism in the Republican party as strongly as Black Americans do—only far more recently and far more obviously.

“The Joker”:  Maybe YOU can pretend this isn’t a racist representation, but I cannot.  The idea of White men dressing up in BlackFace to portray “Mr. Bones” and “Mr. Tambo” talking in absurd “slang” goes back to the mid-19th century minstrel shows, complete with White lips and white rings around the eyes (hence the pejorative “Coons”) To portray a Black Man in the negative-film image of that hits a clear and deep racial tone—and it’s as intentional as putting an image of a barefoot Obama in overalls eating a slice of watermelon.

Perhaps you have been lucky enough to not have grown up with that imagery, left over from the minstrel shows, or even the 20’s and 30’s where it was NORMAL for White jazz singers to perform in BlackFace…Al Jolson singing “Mammy” or “Swannee” in such ridiculous garb.

Sorry, Rico…it doesn’t wash.  I cannot imagine ANY Black man, not even Clarence Thomas, not seeing that image of Obama in Whiteface and not shuddering.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 5:34 pm Link to this comment

“In hundreds and thousands of examples, TPrs are cheering candidates making racial “coded” remarks, and even backing opponents to people who very closely advocate TP alleged principles, but happen to be Democrats.”

-

Those “democrats” on the stump all over the country are sounding like Tea Protesters because the Tea Protesters are their constituents.  Moderates, Independents and Conservatives. Lose sight of that and you’ve changed the context to suite your narrative.

More about “coded racial messages”?  Code phrases like how “My Country Back” suddenly means I HATE BLACK PEOPLE?  Why not simply explain that code before these “thousands” of secret codes you’ve envisioned?

I can’t help but wonder where your sense of outrage was when people here on TruthDig were writing how President Bush murdered Ten Thousand black people in Louisiana?  Did you then label this entire thread as Moon-Bats and dangerous racists like you do Tea Protesters? - Calling attention to the president’s roots is far better proof of loony and unhinged behavior than claims of genocide.

This thing you and others do is dangerous.  It’s needless, foolish, unchecked by reality and/or human nature and dangerous.

-

“Had the TP actually engaged in real dialogue and real valid questions, two things would have happened:”

THIS is your most incredible misjudgment to date, my friend.  The Tea Party has very effectively engaged in dialog and that dialog is on display each and every day on television and in print.  It has effected an entire election cycle.  Your and others constant drum beat of minimizing these people has largely failed.

1) “They” are the magnet for criticism precisely for their collective ability to effect this entire election season and you’re angry about this.
2) “They” have been tremendously successful.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 5:19 pm Link to this comment

ITW:

First of all, no one, not even on the right, pretends that Fox is fair and balanced, so let’s put that to bed.

Next, there are several minority candidates out there being supported by the TP. The most prominent is a guy from Florida, something West, is black, ex-military. Marco Rubio is no Southern Baptist. Race is not a disqualifier for the TP. Yeah, the overall racial profile of the TP doesn’t exactly match the US demographic. Neither does that of the NBA, or the Olympic swim team, or the US Senate. Does that make those groups de facto, racist? Blacks overwhelmingly support the Democratic Party. Is the Democratic Party racist therefore? (And don’t EVEN tell me you can’t be a racist if you’re not white.)

The photo of Obama as the Joker was NOT intended to be racist. The portrayal was to be that of a villain, not a reverse lawn jockey. Must that be explained to you? That was beneath you, ITW.

Finally, the reason the vehemence exploded after he got into office was over his tone deaf policy decisions. Do you really think people woke up on Inauguration Day and said, “Hey! Wait a minute! Nobody told me he was black! This won’t stand!” Yet that’s what Robinson wants us to think.

The Tea Party was not created because we have a black President. It was created for the reasons Rick Santelli spouted on the floor of the Chicago Merc- we are living in a financial and fiscal house of cards, created by banks and Wall Street, abetted and exacerbated, not ameliorated, by government policies, and we’re not going to take it anymore.

To say that the Tea Party exists because Barack Obama is black is a total copout which completely ignores the real issues at stake here.

Report this

By PhreedomPhan, November 2, 2010 at 5:12 pm Link to this comment

It’s amazing how opposition to oppressive government can bring out racists like Robinson screaming “racist” at any who oppose his views.  Was he screaming “racist” at those who opposed the reign of George Bush who appeared to be a white man?  (In politics little or nothing is what it appears to be.)  I consider Bush and Obama to be threats to liberty regardless of race, color,creed, or, as in the case of Obama, national origin.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 2, 2010 at 5:06 pm Link to this comment

So…now the word you toss out as your insult is “dangerous”.

First it was “you have no honor” but that didn’t stick.
Then it was “bigot” but that didn’t stick either.
Then it was “Lose the hate” but, too much Teflon on the wall there, too.
Now it’s “dangerous”...what’s next..“Treasonable”?

Why don’t you try linguine?  THAT stuck to the wall, at least it did for Walter Matthau!

You are surprisingly astute in your brief assessment of Hedges.  Maybe I’d have more respect for you if you posted such perceptive thoughts on his regular vomitus of emotionalism.

Report this
Railbird's avatar

By Railbird, November 2, 2010 at 4:55 pm Link to this comment

The job of writing a column requires meshing a lot of peripheral events and issues.  That works to the advantage of those who are probably in denial opening the door for all sorts of obfuscation. 

Robinson’s point was covered in just this one sentence: “why would this concern about oppressive, intrusive government become so acute now?”

As a native Californian with friends going back to high school (nearly 50 years) who has read e-mail after e-mail in horror due to the racial content, I slowly, reluctantly came to the same conclusions as Mr. Robinson.  We love black comedians and athletes but leaders?  Not so much.  And its not a left/right thing.  Clarence Thomas is loathed for his views but is that all there is to it?  Really?

I found myself nodding at the comments by jjohnjj and I would (sadly) go further with his Hitler reference.  I’ve come to the conclusion that there are millions of white, middle class, Americans (many of whom are Christians) who would have felt right at home at a rally in Germany circa 1930’s.

Report this

By Matzpen, November 2, 2010 at 4:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

If we’re going to be able to fight back against the right and defeat the Tea Baggers then we can’t rely on the Democrats
http://sherrytalksback.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/caught-in-the-election-crossfire/

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment

mrfreeze:

” I can’t remember any being vilified with such vile contempt and open hostility as President Obama.”

You can’t remember the Reagan years? The Bush years???!! Are you serious???

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment

Rico, - “What specifically or even tangentially, have Stuart Jack, Tim Ridley, Warren Coats and Richard Rahn either privately, singly, in concert, or officially, in the name of the CIMA, done to “instigate the launch of wars”?

-

Precisely.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 4:31 pm Link to this comment

ITW, - “How come you never have anything to say about a Chris Hedges article but are always ready to “prove” Gene Robinson is actually a racist?”

-

From Mr. Robinson we get reams of political bigotry and, yes, overt racism broadcast almost daily.  All while labeling others as such.  I detest it. - I defend your and Eugene’s right to speak your mind while defending my own right to call attention to the fact that what you and Robinson do is, not only needless, but dangerous.

Mr. Hedges’ if only humans weren’t human the world would be the way I wish it leaves me largely speechless.  The only thing that comes to mind after forcing myself to listen to Hedges is; thank goodness he represents a minuscule minority on the globe.

I think you’ll find that I do, from time to time, comment on Hedges’ articles.  Particularly when his grievances regarding the Western World mimics those of Dr. Zawahiri, Nasrallah, Awlaki and Nosair.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 2, 2010 at 4:29 pm Link to this comment

rico, suave, November 2 at 7:03 pm Link to this comment

Let’s get back to Robinson’s article.

In a nutshell, the Tea Party is pissed because, in their mind, Obama, Pelosi and company have pushed their progressive agenda too far and too fast.

Liberal progressives look at this generalized objection (all the while arguing that Obama hasn’t gone far enough!), and rather than analyze and criticize the Tea Party’s argument on its merits or lack thereof, it labels them racist for daring to disagree with a black President. It’s cheap and easy, requires not much thought, and in these politically correct times is immuned to rebuttal.

Robinson’s argument also is curious in that, for it to be valid, it requires the existence of two mutually exclusive electorates- the enlightened 2008 one that elected Obama, and the benighted, racist one today that will “refudiate” his presidency. Of course, we are the same electorate. Robinson just can’t face the fact that Obama has let a lot of people down, so he attributes the discontent to racism.

I said two years ago that the Jackson/Sharpton race-baiting and extortion industry had been dealt a serious blow with Obama’s victory. Alas, Robinson still carries the torch.

*************************

Here’s where I disagree: Had the TP asked those questions, and asked them based on FACT rather than wild exaggerations and outlandish assertions (Like the President is Kenyan and Socialist) they would not have raised the questions of their motivation being racist.

Yeah, Obama HAS let a lot of people down, and I’m one of them.  But I don’t have a short memory.  I know damn well when I lost my job, it was only 3 months into the Obama admin, and the economic problems that led there had been reaching critical mass for at least 3 years, if not the whole of the Bush administration.  I see full well that he doesn’t really have a clue about either Iraq OR Afghanistan other than being aware that Bush’s policies in both places were criminally negligent and moronic.

Yet the VEHEMENCE that exploded was AFTER Obama came to office, not when things were dreadful under Bush. In hundreds and thousands of examples, TPrs are cheering candidates making racial “coded” remarks, and even backing opponents to people who very closely advocate TP alleged principles, but happen to be Democrats.  There is not one Democratic candidate that I’m aware of that the TP is supporting.  Not one.  I only know of one non-Caucasian candidate they are backing, the woman running for SC Gov.

I think most people expect Obama to have to take a RAFT of shit from the Right just for being a Democratic President.  Fair enough.  But the clearly racial remarks that started before the inauguration, and the rise of “outrage” before he took office, and the crude and obvious signs (like the Joker Face portrayal) hit all the racial cues. 

Much of it is like 2 kids in the back of the car…Dad says “Don’t touch your sister” so brother hold his finger a sixteenth of an inch from her nose, or her cheek or her ear and says….“But I’m not touching her” in all innocence.  And we’re supposed to buy that?

Had the TP actually engaged in real dialogue and real valid questions, two things would have happened:
1) They wouldn’t be the magnet for criticism I think is well-deserved.
2) They probably wouldn’t be as successful.

I looked at the Fox News site today.  There’s an headline: “Guide to Tea Party Candidates”.  Is there a similar guide to Progressive or even Liberal candidates? Of course not!

Yet I’m supposed to believe the crap that Fox is “Fair and Balanced”?

Report this

By exploitedtimes, November 2, 2010 at 4:27 pm Link to this comment

There is absolutely no doubt that race is a huge factor for Obama, and there is no doubt that a huge portion of the USA is racist - to varying degrees. The country is most racist against blacks, which can easily be shown with the incredible imbalance in judicial convictions, proven systemic racial profiling, income disparity, and other stats which this author has detailed in the past. To state otherwise (that race is not a factor) is blatant denial or naivete in any innocent form. But more often to state otherwise is to purposely perpetuate the very racism that is denied to exist.

With regard to the American dream, the article states that Obama is living or has lived this dream. That would seem to imply the definition of the ‘dream’ is something like this: make a deal with the devil at the crossroads, become the all-time greatest Uncle Tom corporate shill in history, sell out the American public regardless of color and achieve the post of Presidency of the United States, from where scourge of the earth imperialist genocide is increasing at his hand.

Some dream. I’m willing to bet that all Obama has are well-deserved nightmares, and all the money and bogus peace prizes in the world won’t make them go away.

Good article on racism though, they are too few and far between.

Report this
mrfreeze's avatar

By mrfreeze, November 2, 2010 at 4:21 pm Link to this comment

jjohnjj - Your closing comment:

“Honestly, do you think we would be seeing the Hiter/Stalin signs at demonstrations if we had elected a photogenic white southerner like John Edwards to the White House?”

Not only was your post brilliant, but your closing statement pretty much sums up America these days. I’m truly enjoying all the intellectual (phoney) squirming and torturing of the language by a lot of the commentators on this post. Why not just come out and admit that those of you angry at what Robinson wrote ARE a bunch of racists? It’s OK. We know who you are.

The fact is, America today is more like the former Yugoslavia: a collection of mutually antagonistic cultures united in name only. Why try so hard to pretend that we are our own worst enemies?

I’ve lived through 10 administrations now and I can’t remember any being vilified with such vile contempt and open hostility as President Obama. I’m not convinced by you racists that it’s all just in “good political fun!”

Report this

By omygodnotagain, November 2, 2010 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment

Eugene
Would not worry about the abuse,though some may hold racist views, whats more relevant is the fact the BO promised Change. My life has not changed, I am still subject to outrageous interest on credit cards, there is no credit for my small business, the healthcare overhaul merely means I have another mandatory insurance.
If he had shown some socialist toughness, throw a few bankers into jail, undo some of the domestic surveillance, stop torturing prisoners etc he would have been a hero. He acts like he wants to please everyone. It is worth remembering that for LBJ to pass the Civil Rights Act he invited representatives up to his office and physically threatened them. Now that how you deal with lobbyists, and Congressional stoogies.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 4:03 pm Link to this comment

kerryrose,

It’s always interesting to watch your posts.  Your habit has long been to mimic the Obama political machine.  I commend your passion while disagreeing with your vision.

Excuse my bluntness, however, both you and Mr. Obama have turned manic of late. Every divisive tactic has been tried — and yet so far found wanting. We have gone through, in creepy Alinskyite fashion, all the bogeymen, JournoList enemies — Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, Justice Roberts, the Tea Party, John Boehner, Karl Rove, and Ed Gillespie. We have witnessed the furor over the voters’ purported stupidity — the dopey clingers who do not understand science or logic, but are driven by their “fears” to reject the hope and change salvation. Obama hammers that condescension home; everyone from Jimmy Carter to John Kerry in similar exasperation joins that chorus that we know not what we do.

Pots via Kettles

We have also witnessed the blatant hypocrisy of damning opponents for raising money from Wall Street and undisclosed donors. Has the president no shame?

Mr. Obama introduced to American political life a number of fundraising firsts — the first presidential candidate in modern history to refuse public financing of presidential general elections; the first to raise more than $1 billion; and the first Democrat to capture roughly 70% of Wall Street money, making him inter alia the biggest recipient of BP and Goldman Sachs money.

Obama introduced into recent campaign history the technique of using credit cards to hide the identity of the donors. He is so animated at Republican fundraising simply because “they” have out-Obamaed Obama, mastering the tricks and spins that proved so successful in his own ends-justify-the-means 2008 campaign. This was not supposed to happen — this unfair turnabout is fair play. Remember when a liberal Democrat perverts the process of campaign financing then the entire “reform” effort collapses, inasmuch for Republicans electioneering is simply a free speech matter, a free-for-all in the arena issue. Sermonizing progressives alone can destroy the notion that there should be public checks on the financing of candidates (sort of like a conservative Congress and administration running up mega-deficits between 2002-6, and thus discrediting balanced-budgeting).

-

If I may suggest?  You know you’re a partisan when you are angered by corporate donations to the republican party after the current White House occupant raised nearly $700 Million from corporate donors to win the post.  Sound about right to you?

Report this

By Robert, November 2, 2010 at 3:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Tea Party movement is a direct response to the craven nature of Barak Obama. He took office and has literally become an accessory after the fact, instead of initiating proceedings against the Bush administration office holders who lied the US into war or even allowed the “free market system” to weed out the bad decision makers in the financial system he has surrounded himself with the very culprits who brought the US to this precipice. Everyone doesn’t have the intellect to fully articulate the problem but everyone can feel its effects, the Tea Party as miss guided as it may seem is at least responding. The only change that Obama has brought is clear, that a “Black man” isn’t genetically inferior but thats about it (this was for the ignorant amongst us who thought otherwise).
That has been established but his agenda is seriously flawed, so he is every much a fair target. Eugene please stop bringing up the race card and start dealing with the issues, it only serves to trivialize racism. I am black and one thing I have learned over the years is not to allow the press to tell me who is racist and who is not.
For those who need a recent example look at Mel Gibson, anyone who has seen his movies can tell that a man with that level of depth cannot be a racist, yet “the press” have written him off.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment

gerard:

How can you be so rational at times and so goofy at others? That was a good post.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 3:03 pm Link to this comment

Let’s get back to Robinson’s article.

In a nutshell, the Tea Party is pissed because, in their mind, Obama, Pelosi and company have pushed their progressive agenda too far and too fast.

Liberal progressives look at this generalized objection (all the while arguing that Obama hasn’t gone far enough!), and rather than analyze and criticize the Tea Party’s argument on its merits or lack thereof, it labels them racist for daring to disagree with a black President. It’s cheap and easy, requires not much thought, and in these politically correct times is immuned to rebuttal.

Robinson’s argument also is curious in that, for it to be valid, it requires the existence of two mutually exclusive electorates- the enlightened 2008 one that elected Obama, and the benighted, racist one today that will “refudiate” his presidency. Of course, we are the same electorate. Robinson just can’t face the fact that Obama has let a lot of people down, so he attributes the discontent to racism.

I said two years ago that the Jackson/Sharpton race-baiting and extortion industry had been dealt a serious blow with Obama’s victory. Alas, Robinson still carries the torch.

Report this

By gerard, November 2, 2010 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment

From Mr. Robinson:  “I have to wonder what it is about Obama that provokes and sustains all this tea party ire. I wonder how he can be seen as “elitist,”

When the aim is to turn people against each other in order to divide and conquer, race is Divider Number One, and not only in the U.S.
  Number Two (especially in the U.S.) is “Elitism.”
For a couple hundred years, the country has glorified “work” (though not the workers!)
  Schizoid as always, half the time throughout our history “education” has been glorified (mostly for utilitarian reasons, not cultural however).  The other half of the time “education” has been scorned—considered not as important as a lot of other things, even as something which, if you have “too much” of it will cause either you or other people trouble.  You will either be “a snob” or you will “take unfair advantage” of those less educated than yourself.
  In short, Americans are very ambivalent about a lot of important things, and use those ambivalences unconsciously, often to their advantage at the expense of others who are different from themselves.
  The “united” in United States is tenuous at best.
It takes a lot of empathy and forbearance to hold it together.  As elsewhere. 
  Wish us luck—and a whole lot of common sense.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 2, 2010 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment

GRYM:
How come you never have anything to say about a Chris Hedges article but are always ready to “prove” Gene Robinson is actually a racist?

Report this

By Jimnp72, November 2, 2010 at 2:31 pm Link to this comment

let’s take back our country from multinational corporations that now control the
elections thanks to the so called supreme court. some supremacy, to make a
boneheaded ruling like that, my six year old daughter would have shown better
judgement.
Suspect Dubya made a deal with Roberts that in exchange for his nomination,
Roberts would keep favored eye on deregulation of campaign spending; and
Roberts came though, with no case presented, last January. So I suspect it is also
corruption they possess   in addition to their incompetence.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment

kerryrose,

Lazy, you say.

I read the article and found it to be as incoherent and full of supposition as your claim that “shadowy money” can’t be tracked but you have a media source which can track such monies.

Perhaps I am, as you say, lazy.  So I’ll ask a simple question. Can you or not explain the dichotomy in your shadow money theories?  How can these monies be untraceable if you’re claiming to be tracing them as your write?

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 2:01 pm Link to this comment

fearnotruth:

“THE GLOBAL FINANCE OLIGARCHY, who order up provocations to instigate the launch of wars anywhere needed to advance their hegemonic agenda”

Let me pile on with GRYM.

You gave a nice presentation about the Cayman Islands and hedge funds and who runs them, but nowhere did you show or prove that any of the entities you named “order up provocations to instigate the launch of wars”. Demonstrating that a plutocrat exists proves nothing about his actions or intentions.

What specifically or even tangentially, have Stuart Jack, Tim Ridley, Warren Coats and Richard Rahn either privately, singly, in concert, or officially, in the name of the CIMA, done to “instigate the launch of wars”?

Report this

By reynolds, November 2, 2010 at 1:54 pm Link to this comment

the rabid declaimer of racism uses the words “nigger”
and “negro” to make his point. well done.
a bigot, by definition, is intolerant of any outlook
other than his own; that would be you.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, November 2, 2010 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment

ITW,

I will point this out once again.  Not for you but for others here so they can see your hate and bigotry for what it is.

For eight years the Left shouted how they Wanted Their Country back.  ONLY a bigot intently focused on the color of the current president’s skin can take this well worn phrase and turn it into a matter of race.

What ITW and others are doing dangerous.

-

I challenge every bigot here.  Do a search of the term “County Back” on this very Web space prior to 2008.  See for yourselves the hundreds of times the term had been passionately used before a Negro won the White House.  Below is one example of hundreds.  It took me all of 40 seconds to locate.

peacenik1, November 4, 2008 - “This is an historic day for America.  We’re taking our country back

ONLY a pure practicing bigot could believe the term to mean “I Hate Black People”!

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, November 2, 2010 at 1:40 pm Link to this comment

kerryrose:

If shadowy money can’t be tracked, how do you know how much it is?

And come, on. At the risk of sounding condescending, let me help you with the math. The Dems have outraised the Repubs $800 million to $700 million total nationwide. That includes “shadowy” money and sunny money. Quit harping on shadow money. It’s all legal, if not moral, anyway.

Report this

By jjohnjj, November 2, 2010 at 1:38 pm Link to this comment

Rather than “racist”, I prefer the term “Cypto-racist”. I know it sounds academic, but I can’t think of a more common term to describe it.

The Tea Puppets look hurt and surprised when you call them a racist because they associate that word with old-fashion segregation. They understand that their parents lost the civil rights battle in the ‘60s. They know that their children will disapprove if they talk openly like George Wallace.

So they’ve buried their feelings deep behind a mask of anti-government rhetoric. And why not? It was the federal government that ended segregation.

They understand that America is now, and will remain, an integrated society. They just believe that they have a civil right not to participate in that society. They don’t want to bring back segregated schools. They just want to send their kids to a non-integrated school, and not pay any taxes toward public education.

That’s why they talk like a persecuted minority and wrap themselves it the “Spririt of ‘76”.

Segregation isn’t their cause now, but racism is the passion that drives reason and common sense straight out their window. That’s why we hear things like “Keep your government hands off my Medicare!”

Honestly, do you think we would be seeing the Hiter/Stalin signs at demonstrations if we had elected a photogenic white southerner like John Edwards to the White House?

Report this
fearnotruth's avatar

By fearnotruth, November 2, 2010 at 1:32 pm Link to this comment

RE: If pressed; would you be able to name this group of oligarchs you write
of?  Are you able to lend names and faces to these people?

indeed, whom would be abel?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5045

London’s Cayman Islands: The Empire of the Hedge Funds

According to representatives of Charles Adams, Ritchie & Duckworth, a Cayman
Islands law firm that is involved in the hedge-fund business, the Cayman
Islands offer prospective hedge funds:

* “No regulatory restriction on investment policies or strategies, commercial
terms ... , or choice of service providers….

* “Tax-neutral environment with no direct corporation, capital gains, income,
profits or withholding taxes applicable to funds” (emphasis added).

The only information that the CIMA will release about a hedge fund, is that it is
registered, and where its registered office is. The names of investors and other
minimal information are kept strictly secret. Since the Cayman Islands have no
tax laws, the CIMA shares little or no information with other nations’ authorities
on tax matters. On other matters, it is up to the CIMA whether it will “share or
divulge information.”

On the whole, neither the United States’ Securities and Exchange Commission,
nor other countries’ regulatory bodies, have any regulatory authority over
hedge funds. Moreover, neither the SEC, nor other bodies, have pierced the
CIMA’s armor.

The 1993 Mutual Fund Law had its effect: with direction from the City of
London, the number of hedge funds operating in the Cayman Islands exploded:
from 1,685 hedge funds in 1997, to 8,282 at the end of the third quarter 2006,
a fivefold increase. Cayman Island hedge funds are four-fifths of the world
total. Globally, hedge funds hold $1.44 trillion in assets under management,
but through using leverage of anywhere from 5 to 20 times, they command up
to $30 trillion of deployable funds.

But the Anglo-Dutch oligarchy built an entire financial superstructure on the
Cayman Islands. Aside from the Caymans’ huge holdings of hedge-fund assets,
the Islands’ banking system possesses assets of $1.41 trillion (though this
includes some overlap with the hedge fund assets). The offshore, unregulated
Cayman Islands has the fourth-largest banking system in the world—after
those of the United Stats, Japan, and Britain. Compare: The United States has
300 million people, the Cayman Islands has 57,000.

The Cayman Islands also is the world’s number-two jurisdiction for captive
insurance companies (a type of limited-purpose, and increasingly speculative
insurance company). Cayman licensees hold $29.6 trillion in assets.

The Queen’s Men

To have the Caymans function as an epicenter for globalization and financial
warfare, the Anglo-Dutch oligarchy hand-selected the top Cayman officials.

* Since late 2005, the Governor of the Islands, approved by the office of the
Queen, is Stuart Duncan Jack, a career officer of the British Foreign Office. For
his service, Jack was knighted Commander of the Royal Victorian Order, a
chivalric order founded by Queen Victoria, which ranks above that of the Order
of the British Empire.

* Timothy Ridley, the chairman of the vital Cayman Islands Monetary Authority,
is a lawyer who was knighted as a member of the Order of the British Empire
for his role in building up the hedge funds and their infrastructure during the
1990s.

Two Americans on the board of the CIMA, further indicate the nasty character
of that institution.

* Warren Coats, who served for 26 years with the International Monetary Fund,
was called in by the United States to be an advisor to Iraq and Afghanistan on
“rebuilding money and banking systems”—which has resulted in disaster.

* Richard Rahn, a member of the Mont Pelerin Society, the oligarchy’s
coordinating center for deregulation and elimination of the nation-state, is also
the head of the Center for Economic Growth.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook