I am assuming you guys have seen this. I'm pretty much of out of outrage, especially given the fact that all of this is backfiring on these cats. Wasn't it MLK who said the arc of the universe bends towards justice? I think I can see the curve. By the way this wasn't some nut at a rally--it was a local Republican Party office. Think this can't be tied to McCain and the national GOP? I guess. But you'll have to tell me why McCain is out campaigning with one of his own officials, who urged his workers to push the Obama is a terrorist line.
All of this brings me to another point, one I've made before. It's all fine to attack liberals for upholding "diversity" or for being too "politically correct." I basically agree that Affirmative Action is problematic and a debate is in order. But lefties shouldn't be chastened by thier failures. Here is the thing--at least we're taking up the challenge. We were the first to understand that a country ruled by White Men--not on merit, but by bigoted design--was country on suicide watch.
Our soloutions have been imperfect, wrong, and sometimes straight quackery. But we've been trying, and we have not ducked the long, twisting journey into our identity as Americans. This willingness to take the trip (even when we don't know where the bus is headed), the courage to confront our own prejudices is, in some measure at least the reason our rallies look like this and their's look like that. We've spent the last 40 years grappling with great problems of our democracy --race, gender, poverty. Meanwhile, they've been sitting in the corner cracking watermelon, fried chicken jokes and waxing sarcastic over the health of pregnant women. This is who they are.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
I hope Americans are at a point where they can look at something like this and laugh at the people who made it. Because then we can laugh at all their other lies and untruths, their smears and exaggerations.
And then we win.
Putting aside that this "obamabuck" thing is offensive, and nonproductive for its authors, and everything else that Coates says it is.
From a person who likes to poke fun at all races and ethnic groups, this shit is not even funny. Barbecue, watermelon & CoolAid? Is that the best they could come up with? What is this 1975? Come on now. On top of everything else, this shit is just lame.
We've spent the last 40 years grappling with great problems of our democracy --race, gender, poverty. Meanwhile, they've been sitting in the corner cracking watermelon, etc.
Well, maybe, but "they" were also ending the Cold War, and were fighting for the human rights of millions of people under Communism before it ended.
Lech Walesa (of the Solidarity movement in Poland) didn't thank MLK Jr. for bringing down the Soviet Empire, he thanked Ronald Reagan. Maybe a lot of conservatives had bigger fish to fry than "race, gender, poverty." Living in the Soviet Union or the Eastern Bloc, now that was poverty.
Do you mean like LBJ's "War on Poverty"? Oh yeah, that was a huge success. Why, black families have just thrived due to liberal confrontations against poverty.
Yeah, it's "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice." According to Facebook and a few other places, this is Barack's favorite quote.
I was introduced to the line when a professor of mine said it to a student who was whining about a grade he got on a paper. It was awesome.
Laugh? Seriously? Laugh?
It would seem we have been laughing a little too damn much lately. Its about time some people got pissed off. We allow ourselves to be marginalized with words like "race card" and then when something like this comes up we are supposed to just brush it off? HELL TO THE NAWL! The woman who ran that newsletter should be excommunicated from the Republican party and WE should be the ones calling for it. John McCain is campaigning this weekend with a guy who encourages canvassers to compare Obama to bin Ladin. Where is our righteous outrage? Are we so cowed by the right wing machine that we just allow ourselves to be treated any kind of way? depicted any kind of way? talked to any kind of way? Where is the line? Where is the line where we say enough is e frikking nough? This is sanctioned bigotry under the GOP banner and instead of laughing at it we should be releasing our rage about it to every media outlet available. I hope that we find away to get out politically correct heads out of the damn sand soon and recognize that we are dangerously close to going backwards in terms of the respect we demand as black people in this country because of instances like this.
"I was introduced to the line when a professor of mine said it to a student who was whining about a grade he got on a paper. It was awesome."
Yes, that's the ticket. Eventually the arc of the moral universe bends to proper grade distribution. I'm sure that's what King meant.
From a person who likes to poke fun at all races and ethnic groups, this shit is not even funny. Barbecue, watermelon & CoolAid? Is that the best they could come up with? What is this 1975? Come on now.
I think whoever came up with Obamabucks learned about black culture from a steady diet of "Good Times" and 1980's era suburban middle school jokes.
Maybe the KoolAid is a reference to Jim Jones and his followers. That is, be careful about following a messiah, he might disappoint you.
>i>I hope Americans are at a point where they can look at something like this and laugh at the people who made it.
Or yawn. Ta-Nehisi is exactly right. These kinds of jokes are all around us. You just don't hear them most of the time.
Well, maybe, but "they" were also ending the Cold War, and were fighting for the human rights of millions of people under Communism before it ended.
And supporting murderous thugs like Pinochet? Yeah, real support for human rights!! Spare me the Conservative/Republican nonsense. The facts don't back you up.
From the first article that was linked to, this is worth highlighting:
Sheila Raines, an African-American member of the club, was the first person to complain to Fedele about the newsletter. Raines, of San Bernardino, said she has worked hard to try to convince other minorities to join the Republican Party and now she feels betrayed.
"This is what keeps African-Americans from joining the Republican Party," she said. "I'm really hurt. I cried for 45 minutes."
oh yeah and for those who thought John Lewis stepped over the line with his statement on the tone of the McCain-Palin rallys. Ill bet this journalist would beg to differ.
http://joekillian.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/how-i-became-joe-sixpack/
Weaved in amongst the crowd were a what looked like a few dozen Obama supporters - some wearing Obama shirts, others in street clothes. As Palin got into her speech they began chants of “Obama” and screamed out rebuttals to the points in her speech. This angered some in the crowd — some responding with cursing, others chanting “U.S.A.” and “NObama” to drown them out. Eventually the cops came and escorted them off of the baseball field.
Then it happened again, elsewhere in the crowd.
N&R political reporter Mark Binker and I were on different sides of the crowd - but we both got the same reaction from Palin fans as we craned our necks to see what the disturbance was.
“That’s not the story, the story’s up there on the stage!” someone yelled at Binker.
“Ain’t nothing to look at and don’t you write about it!” I was told.
To her credit: Palin stopped the speech to suggest that maybe the security shouldn’t escort the protesters off — maybe they should “stay and learn something.”
Not so very to her credit: she did not actually instruct security to let them stay.
After the speech was over I was walking around getting peoples’ reactions to it when I wandered into several clusters of sign waving Obama supporters outside the stadium area. They were surrounded by McCain-Palin folks and both sides were yelling at each other.
I sidled up to one of the Obama supporters and asked why they were there, what they were trying to accomplish.
As he was telling me a large, bearded man in full McCain-Palin campaign regalia got in his face to yell at him.
“Hey, hey,” I said. “I’m trying to interview him. Just a minute, okay?”
The man began to say something about how of course I was interviewing the Obama people when suddenly, from behind us, the sound of a pro-Obama rap song came blaring out of the windows of a dorm building. We all turned our heads to see Obama signs in the windows.
This was met with curses, screams and chants of “U.S.A” by McCain-Palin folks who crowded under the windows trying to drown it out and yell at the person playing the stereo.
It was a moment of levity in an otherwise very tense situation and so I let out a gentle chuckle and shook my head.
“Oh, you think that’s funny?!” the large bearded man said. His face was turning red. “Yeah, that’s real funny…” he said.
And then he kicked the back of my leg, buckling my right knee and sending me sprawling onto the ground.
From my position there I saw the bottoms of a number of feet almost accidentally stomping me to death as the two political camps screamed back and forth, the music continued to blare and some of the Obama crowd moved the large bearded man and his friends away. When I was helped to my feet the bearded man was walking away quickly.
For a moment I considered running the bloated, twelve-sandwich eating prick down and beating the living hell out of him…and then I remembered that I’m a reporter, how much I enjoy being gainfully employed and how hard it would be to keep my job if I got into a fistfight with a guy at a political rally.
So instead I limped off to try to find a security guard or cop.
When I did the guy was nowhere to be found.
“He’s this big fat guy with a brown beard and he’s wearing a McCain-Palin shirt and hat,” I said.
And then felt like an idiot. I was surrounded by people who fit that description.
So I simply limped to my car fuming.
Maybe a lot of conservatives had bigger fish to fry than "race, gender, poverty." Living in the Soviet Union or the Eastern Bloc, now that was poverty.
Try telling that to Chaney, Schwerner and Goodman, or Denise McNair, Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson and Addie Mae Collins.
Seriously, are you trying to get people to be Democrats?
@repub
The fact that you think that fighting injustice abroad was a "bigger fish to fry" then fighting against injustice at home is why African Americans don't vote for Republicans and after this election never will.
Maybe you can get all of those Eastern Europeans conservatives "liberated" from communism to vote for the GOP. It's hard to see what's right in front of your nose and your party's inability to see women, the poor and minorities right here in your country has lead you to minority status for the next generation. The people who you thought weren't the right "fish to fry" are now the majority and they don't appreciate the neglect or the food stamp jokes.
p.s. Regean is dead and the world, including much of the former Soviet Block loves and wants Obama to win. And all of the people your party ignored are going to make that happen. NOW GO FRY THAT FISH!
Someone needs to write a dissertation titled "Who is They? Recovering Meaning From the Context."
Two quick hits
1. I'm glad the Obama campaign had no comment. Any comment is an invitation for somebody to claim a "race card" is being played.
2. The woman who sent this claimed she had no idea it was racist. Hah! Since the Obama campaign decided not to respond, it left it open for everybody else to draw a conclusion -- and everybody gets the reference and knows she's a racist and knows she's full of sh*t.
Shouting down a racist can be cathartic, but watching them get enveloped in their own flames is something I can really savor.
"Maybe the KoolAid is a reference to Jim Jones and his followers. That is, be careful about following a messiah, he might disappoint you."
Yes, and maybe the bucket of KFC is a reference to how poorly Obama did in Kentucky during the primaries. Yeah, that's it!!
"The woman who sent this claimed she had no idea it was racist. Hah!"
Yeah, I saw that on Countdown. To me, pretending to not recognize that your "Obama bucks" is racist is much more insulting than the actual Obama bucks themselves. I mean, who does this idiot think she's kidding?
You all care so much about gender, but you have such contempt and disdain for Sarah Palin. I'm not a supporter of hers, and think she is out of her league. But the venomous hatred directed at her by the left is appalling. When you all talk about how much you care for gender, why do you not seek to include women like Palin? Do you only care about gender when you are talking about liberals?
My wife for many years was a stay-at-home Mom. Now she's working as an accountant. The kind of snide or incredulous comments she heard from liberals was truly distressing to her. What's wrong with a woman making such a choice for the sake of her family, at the expense of her career? Why isn't that included in your concern for gender?
Ask around. There are lots of women who don't look at gender issues the way you all (i.e. liberals) do. But those women don't count, obviously.
Meanwhile, I lift a glass of wine to Margaret Thatcher.
I think this is what rankles me most about the Republican Party (as opposed to Republican ideology, which has some good aspects to it).
It's the rank hypocrisy of calling out liberals (sometimes rightfully) for things like impracticality and a political-driven agenda and divisiveness.
But then they turn around and Act the Biggest Bloody Hypocrites by doing all the things they claim to disavow. They talk the talk of personal responsibility, but refuse to walk that walk as a party, admit their mistakes, and give real credit to their opponents. To act like grownups.
It will be a cold day in Hell before the Republican Party ever credits someone like Al Gore or the environmental movement in general for leadership and foresight on an issue that their businessmen and evangelists are only now starting to take up seriously: global warming.
Identity sensitivity is another one. They are quick to criticize "victimology" and accuse various groups: black people, women, gay people, Latinos, etc etc etc of complaining too much and dividing the country. But I swear, they perpetuate this themselves by taking offense to various perceived slights (aka talking heads on FOX really working themselves up into outrage over something innocuous like Obama's referring to his grandmother, who he loves very much, as a "typical white person"), or anger at women who criticize unequal pay or harrassment, or hypersensitivity to criticizing our military.
It irks me when people don't act like adults. But it irks me more when they accuse other people of not taking responsibility, while not taking responsibility. Which is why McCain's worst moment this whole season was when he chose to complain and WHINE in a debate about JOHN LEWIS's critique of his campaign. He completely dodged any responsibility or SIMPLE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of the frightening mob mentality he and Palin refuse to take seriously at their own rallies, preferring to cast himself as a victim. It's what irritated me about Bill Clinton too, that "oh poor me poor me I didn't do anything poor me" thing. It's no less annoying in John McCain.
Okay. Rant over.
"And then felt like an idiot."
Well, yeah.
This is why we need more than a narrow victory in November. We need to crush these people. Crush them.
Put down the wine, brah, its not even noon.
John McCain is campaigning this weekend with a guy who encourages canvassers to compare Obama to bin Ladin. Where is our righteous outrage?
Perhaps if some people on the left didn't use insulting Nazi and Stalin comparisons (like Robert Wexler, Durban, Dean, et al), the outrage would have more meaning. As for excommunication, Jesse Jackson survived "hymietown", Joe Biden got a promotion eventhough he mocked Indians and 7-11's, and Hillary made a crack about Ghandi pumping her gas. I am not saying those are necessarily as offensive , but they were offensive to somebody.
repub:
"Well, maybe, but "they" were also ending the Cold War, and were fighting for the human rights of millions of people under Communism before it ended.
Lech Walesa (of the Solidarity movement in Poland) didn't thank MLK Jr. for bringing down the Soviet Empire, he thanked Ronald Reagan. Maybe a lot of conservatives had bigger fish to fry than "race, gender, poverty." Living in the Soviet Union or the Eastern Bloc, now that was poverty."
That might be the weakest straw man argument ever: "We wuz fightin' the Commies! How could we possibly have time to address issues of race in the USA?"
In 1954 after Brown v. Board of Education, the right wing nutters certainly managed to find time to resist desegregation.
Lech Walesa (of the Solidarity movement in Poland) didn't thank MLK Jr. for bringing down the Soviet Empire, he thanked Ronald Reagan. Maybe a lot of conservatives had bigger fish to fry than "race, gender, poverty." Living in the Soviet Union or the Eastern Bloc, now that was poverty.
Those conservatives would never put up with bullshit like this--but those conservatives are not exactly thick on the ground these days.
I wish the WWII generation had stopped the nonsense of fighting the Nazis, the Fascists, and the Japanese Imperialists, and had gotten their priorities straight by fighting "injustice" at home rather than abroad.
Of course, there were a lot of "the women, the poor, and the minorities" in those lands who were mighty grateful that we cared about injustices abroad. Ask the Chinese how they were treated by the occupying Japanese. Learn about the Rape of Nanking. We won't even talk about Europe, since they don't count due to their non-minority status as whites.
Emma, when you talk about poverty, do you include whites? What have you done for Appalachia lately?
@anotherrepub
Margret Thatcher would be ashamed of Sarah Palin's ignorance, stupidity, arrogance and mean spiritedness. From Thatcher to Palin represents the devolution of conservatism. Palin couldn't hold Margret Thatcher's jock.
Posted by anotherrepub
You all care so much about gender, but you have such contempt and disdain for Sarah Palin. I'm not a supporter of hers, and think she is out of her league. But the venomous hatred directed at her by the left is appalling. When you all talk about how much you care for gender, why do you not seek to include women like Palin? Do you only care about gender when you are talking about liberals?
I am calling you out on this. I want you to give examples right now of what you are talking about. List chapters and verse what "liberals" are doing to Sarah Palin any more than what YOU just said about her being unqualified. You are full of sht and I know you wont respond but this is the same false equivalency that rethugs try to use now. "Ohhhhhhhhh they are being sooooooo rough on Sarah Palin" PROVE IT. If you can point to some "liberals" being unfair to Sarah Palin I would love to see it. Otherwise STFU and keep your false equivalency to yourself!
yep I said it
"You all care so much about gender, but you have such contempt and disdain for Sarah Palin."
This is a false dichotomy.
One can feel strongly that Ledbetter should have gotten fair pay and there should be more women in politics and executive positions.
One can also feel strong contempt and disdain for Sarah Palin because she's an utterly ignorant, unqualified, corrupt mess of a politician who would have been laughed out of McCain's selection committee if she were a man. This is not arguable.
It's this attitude of "Democrats and Independents love women, they'll love Palin" that made the pick in the first place, and for you to still try to make it shows how utterly out of touch you are with the America outside of your 23%. Enjoy wandering in the wilderness with Palin.
"In 1954 after Brown v. Board of Education, the right wing nutters certainly managed to find time to resist desegregation."
I seem to recall that desegregation was enforced by a president named Eisenhower. Now what party was he from again? I can't seem to recall...
When was the last time a liberal gave Eisenhower any credit? When was the last time a liberal gave Nixon any credit for his affirmative action policies?
I like what Dan said here: "This is why we need more than a narrow victory in November. We need to crush these people. Crush them."
It reminds me of this line from Conan the Barbarian:
Mongol General: What is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.
I actually thought the Obama-bucks was kinda funny. With the joke being on the person who made it. Like seriously, Mr. Kool-Aid - LOL.
It's like, "hey everyone, Obama's a black, ya know, they drink Kool-Aid (purple drink), have BBQ's, and Fried Chix, thus you should not vote for him."
Emma, when you talk about poverty, do you include whites? What have you done for Appalachia lately?
Posted by repub
Here is the funny part that republicans don't seem to get. White people make up the majority of any entitlement program in sheer numbers. There are more white welfare recipients than black ones. There are lot more white people on medicare/medicaid/social security than there are black ones. So when we black people support democrats who support entitlement programs thats our contribution to poor white people who are too ignorant to know when they are voting against their own interests. Joe the plumber comes to mind who wants to say no to a tax break for himself to "save" all of those unfortunate downtrodden millionaires from having their taxes raised back to what they were in the Great Depression that was the Clinton administration. Snark added
Repub,
Give me a fucking break. You know quite well we didn't nuke Japan to make up for the Rape of Nanking (and spend billions rebuilding them afterwards while leaving China in its isolation and poverty). You know fighting communism had absolutely nothing to do with Eastern European poverty and everything to do with the US wanting to be the sole hegemonic power.
And most importantly, you know damn well that Republicans don't care *at all* about the economic situation of anybody in Applachia. They know they can run on God, guns, and gays and win all their votes, so why bother giving them jobs or tax breaks? What have YOU done?
Do you think we're that stupid?
I'm pretty sure plenty of nice things about Ike were said at the Dem convention and around the time when his granddaughter endorsed Obama.
Eisenhower wouldn't have a place in the modern GOP. Hell, Nixon would be considered far too liberal on social issues for the current crop of crazies.
What's wrong with a woman making such a choice for the sake of her family, at the expense of her career?
What choice are you talking about and who criticized her for this mysterious choice? As for the general question of liberal derision directed toward Palin, most of what I have seen is completely righteous anger directed toward an individual clearly feels comfortable abusing power, telling outright and destructive lies about her political opponents and shirking the well being of women if it suits her purposes, either personal or political. Your entirely vague complaint about the "venomous hatred" of some unspecified liberals does little to counteract my sense of that, which is to say it is pretty unpersuasive.
Can I ask a serious question?
Where does this stereotype come from, that black men like watermelon and fried chicken? I've seen and heard that over the years, and never really got it.
@anotherrepub Careful painting with a broad brush, buddy, you might make a mess.
My wife (a crazy liberal like myself) is a stay-at-home mother. I've yet to watch her denounce herself for the choice.
I wonder if some women aren't put off by Governor Palin because she comes across as completely unqualified for the position. Put yourself in the position of hoping for a representative of your particular under-represented group. Now, if the person representing you is obviously unqualified, wouldn't you be annoyed? Ground-breakers (unfairly) are asked to be spokespersons for their group. As a spokesperson for women in government, she's second rate. As you said, "she is out of her league."
Also, Governor Palin is employed. I'm not sure I see the connection between stay-at-home mothers and disdain for Governor Palin.
"When was the last time a liberal gave Eisenhower any credit? When was the last time a liberal gave Nixon any credit for his affirmative action policies?"
Eisenhower would be a Democrat now. His descendants are. He was a good president.
Nixon was a corrupt bastard, and while he may have had affirmative action policies, Atwater and the rest of their party have run racially and culturally tinged campaigns for decades. There's a reason blacks vote 85% for white Democrats versus black Republicans. Maybe you should figure out why you have to go back fourty years to make your point?
Well, maybe, but "they" were also ending the Cold War, and were fighting for the human rights of millions of people under Communism before it ended.
Ah yes, because only Conservatives were fighting Communism. I forgot that the entire Cold War doctrine of containment, the Berlin Airlift, the Cuban Missile Crisis (which was partially a ploy by the Soviets to get the the US out of West Berlin), the Korean War, the Vietnam War, etc, were all championed by Democrats.
Some of these were disastrous/immoral (see: Vietnam War), but to say that only Conservatives (and I refuse to use the small "c" variant of this word, because you are not worthy of it) only serves to indicate your complete and total ignorance of history.
Of course, in the US, saying the words Conservative and ignorant in the same sentence is a bit redundant.
First, WWII was pre-civil rights era and a believe that was a Democratic president, FDR in charge fighting that war.
Second, when I say "the poor", I'm taking about lots of white people because most poor people are white. Are you assuming that I don't know that or is it that you didn't know that? I wonder if the food stamp jokes bother them too?
Third, as far as Appalaciah goes, from OH to PA to NC to WV to GA, the GOP is losing them too. Enjoy your political minority status because you earned it.
Couple things---
1-not a cultist- you are giving the people who drew this up far too much credit. (interestingly, I live down the street from the Seminary Jim Jones attended)
2. I almost agree with Repub. I still firmly believe rascism exists and is an issue but I feel the issue which deserves our attention most is poverty. It doesn't discriminate based on colors. Certain groups might be more likely to be in it or fall into it, but It's something that needs to be addressed for all Americans.
And I firmly believe Obama's taxation benefits reflect the belief that class/poverty not race is the issue which requires our attention most.
I seem to recall that desegregation was enforced by a president named Eisenhower. Now what party was he from again? I can't seem to recall...
When was the last time a liberal gave Eisenhower any credit? When was the last time a liberal gave Nixon any credit for his affirmative action policies?
You are correct. I am a liberal and I do give Ike credit for that (as well as having a more progressive tax structure than that proposed by Sen. Obama) and to Nixon for funding the admittedly imperfect/ineffective Great Society programs.
However, what I was addressing in my post was the idea from Repubs post that the right wing couldn't address issues of race because they were too busy with the Cold War. As if raising defense spending prevented them from thinking "Hey, maybe we shouldn't be making watermelon jokes and demonizing so-called welfare queens at every opportunity"
It is not for no reason that upon signing the Civil Rights Act, LBJ remarked "there goes the South for a generation (or two)"
"This is who they are."
Thanks for posting that, TNC.
I happen to be a former fetus as well. Almost 28 years ago now, my own mother was pregnant, and a college student in rural Pennsylvania at the time. Abortion was perfectly legal. And she chose to have me. Seems like I'd be right in line with Ed Whelan up to that point, right?
Not exactly. You see, she was going through a divorce at the time (she'd married young), and had gotten pregnant with me by a man other than her husband. From the available evidence I have, it seems that her family and community had disowned her. These wonderful "Christians" apparently made it necessary for her to give birth to me at home, alone, with no one to help her. I was born with a separated collarbone, an injury that never healed completely right. I was given up for adoption on my second day in the world. Although I've never found out for sure, there was no indication that she ever married my father (who also had a wife of his own).
Yes, my mother chose life. But that was despite her culture (which heaped shame on her) and despite her parents (who abandoned her). Not because of it.
I consider myself (generally) pro-life. I think that abortion is awful, and we ought to do everything we can to minimize its instance. (I stop short at calling for making abortion illegal, because I don't think that would actually reduce the number of abortions).
But when I see Ed Whelan writing things like that, I'm reminded why I'm not with his bunch. As far as I'm concerned, he has absolutely no standing on that question.
Check me, TNC, but I believe the quote is from Theodore Parker, pre-Civil War abolitionist.
I'll give Nixon credit for enforcing some affirmative action policies and I'll also give him credit for creating the Southern Strategy.
I forgot that the entire Cold War doctrine of containment, the Berlin Airlift, the Cuban Missile Crisis (which was partially a ploy by the Soviets to get the the US out of West Berlin), the Korean War, the Vietnam War, etc, were all championed by Democrats.
Thank you, Democrats, for Korea and Vietnam. Just fuck'n great.
And thank you for the Bay of Pigs fiasco too. Morons.
(But I forgot, at least Cuba provides free health care.)
Tel,
That was a great post.
The rest of this is descending into a bad episode of McLaughlin Group. I'm switching on moderation.
"You see, she was going through a divorce at the time (she'd married young), and had gotten pregnant with me by a man other than her husband."
That wasn't smart. What was she thinkin'?
"You know, Dr. King once said that the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. It bends toward justice. But here’s the thing: it doesn't bend on its own. It bends because each of us puts our hands on that arc and bends it in the direction of justice. Because we organize and we mobilize, we march, we vote, we parent, we’re active in our community, we’re active in our schools." --Barack Obama, April 4, 2008 (The last sentence is on the video but not in the prepared remarks)
"Thank you, Democrats, for Korea and Vietnam. Just fuck'n great."
Yeah, dude. Keep playing the blame game. Massively complex multi-year situations can all be boiled down to "it's all the DEMOCRATS' fault!!" It's like a football game to you, isn't it?
Keep wondering why you can't seem to win any moderates anymore.
For Repub and Bluecollar,
-----------------------------------------------
You just can't agree that this is some real foul shit can you? You can’t bring yourself to acknowledge it. You're demonstrating Coates point. There is no introspection here, just denial and an immature lashing out.
Did you read the story? A black woman, republican / conservative, laments that stunts like this prevent minorities from giving the GOP an honest hearing.
And instead of piggy backing off her sentiments and pivoting to why GOP policies could be efficacious to the black community what do you do? You toss out a bomb that those Negroes should be happy they didn't live in commie Russia...with a swipe to MLK Jr. for good measure. Wow.
In the time you have spent nurturing your defensiveness you have apparently missed the connection between what Dr. King fought for and it's meaning to authoritarian states the world over. During Dr. King’s life your fellow black citizens were routinely treated like they inhabited an eastern bloc nation.
Clearly you have issues with race for even intimating that black American have had it easy, especially with the bullshit equivalency you tried to pull regarding communist states. Stunning.
But Lech wouldn't have found a Dr. King or a Nelson Mandela inspiring would he? (Even though he's said so before) No, those guys didn't do any heavy lifting..And in fact their black asses should be happy we tolerated them. Meet the new GOP, same as the Old GOP.
This is why Colin Powell, J.C. Watts, and even Michael Steele have all commented at some point on the tone deafness and racial blind spot the GOP has. And you go ahead and prove their point with your comments. Great Job!!
I would have loved to been a fly on the wall during the creative session that took place in creating this marketing piece:
Thug 'A': Let's put a picture of fried chicken in the bottom right.
Group: Bwahahaha. That's Perfect! Love it! Too funny!
Thug 'B': And watermelon
Thug 'C': Done. We've got a watermelon clip on file from July's Confederate Flag Raising ceremony.
Thug 'A': Don't they drink Kool-Aid?
Group: Hmmm. Dunno. Yep, I've heard that one...ghetto juice or something...let's use it.
Boss: I think you guys are on the right track...keep workin on it. We need these out by Friday to coincide with the Curious George Campaign"
Seriously...the disturbing thing is the campaign thinking voters will find this is as funny as they do. No consideration for the possibility of offending someone.
TNC: I believe the MLK quote is "The arc of history is long, sharp, and heavy, and it is falling straight towards your necks at a thousand miles an hour, you Republican jerks."
But I may be misremembering that.
Waterloo: Wow, you so missed the point of that post...
I'm done engaging trolls today, so this will be my last post on this subject, but I'll leave you with this: In the past 10 years, no group has done more damage to the political/economic standing of the US than Conservatives. 30 trillion in new debt/unfunded liabilities; an over leveraged/stretched military; ALL of our major adversaries strengthened; and an economy in collapse.
ALL of these are Conservatives babies. With the exception of the Secessionist movement, no group has done more to damage this country than Conservatives (as the other poster noted, you get the big C designation because you're the complete and total anti-thesis of a small c conservative)
This made me LOL. I've never in my life heard a negative statement about Eisenhower from any liberal. John Judis at The National Review praised Eisenhower's temperament in passing just this morning.
Like Adam said Eisenhower would be a Democrat today and the GOP base would be howling about what a tax-loving, Social-Security-expanding, public-works-creating, states-right-crushing socialist he is.
Dig the Obama rally pic featuring the squinting Mark Ruffalo
you dont feel like you conflating republican, conservative and racist here... there is a point in what your saying, but it feels like an overreach
I think there is an important lesson to take away from the Obama buck - and its one that I actually find uplifting.
The Obama buck is designed by its creators to deny Barack's humanity. It denies his existence as a real man. It is designed to lower him. To debase him. To say that he is nothing more than a collection of Black stereotypes: the Kool-aid, the chicken, the watermelon. The Obama buck is stupid, crass and ignorant certainly. What I find uplifting is that it is utterly powerless.
Barack cannot be lowered. He has not and will not allow his humanity to be denied. With his poised, calm, intellect he embodies a complete rejection of everything the Obama buck represents. The Obama buck is meaningless to Barack, because he is obviously so much more than the cliches they are failing to force on him.
The cliches on the Obama buck are a vestige of a time that is passed. I'll bet most people under 25 don't even recognize the symbols on the Obama buck as racial slanders - its just not how the kids talk these days.
So, in short, what I find so uplifting is that the Obama buck is an EPIC FAIL, and everyone knows it.
"I wish the WWII generation had stopped the nonsense of fighting the Nazis, the Fascists, and the Japanese Imperialists, and had gotten their priorities straight by fighting "injustice" at home rather than abroad."
The WWII generation oversaw the greatest expansion in civil rights for blacks since Reconstruction.
They don't call Sacramento "Sucktown" for nothing.
But when I see Ed Whelan writing things like that
Writing things like what? I don't see where else he was mentioned on this thread.
I agree with some of the remarks at 11:20, in that I thought a lot of the leftern response to Palin was over the top and embarrassing. People acted like they thought a working mother would be an unknown phenomenon to social conservatives, rather than their norm. (Except for Dr. Laura, of course, who opposed her on those grounds in all sincerity.) I thought some of the overreaction to Joe the Plumber was similar; we should treat him as an undecided to be won over, while pointing out that he isn't the mythical guy hurt by Obama's tax plan, and that McCain seized on him because non-mythical people are hard to find. ("I was going to get a promotion and start clearing $260,000 a year! But Obama's plan would raise my taxes $900 over what they are now, so I'm turning it down." I'm not actually surprised they can't find these people.) There seems to be such a kneejerk reaction post-Kerry and the swiftboating that it does come across as an eagerness to trash anyone on the opposing side.
Not that I take her seriously. Margaret Thatcher never winked at the audience during a debate, though Betty Boop did in the cartoon in which she booped for president. And the woman now has her SS guys keeping the mean ol' press away from her delicate supporters, which I don't think is the protection the secret service is supposed to provide. No, I will not treat her as a serious candidate, and McCain's choice of her does, in my mind, disqualify him. (And I'm one of those independents who, a year ago, thought I would be happy with a McCain presidency.)
However, look at Sarge's challenge for you guys to come up with examples. One can find hateful speech on blogs for any topic, including how much airtime Amanda gets on Ugly Betty. T-shirts too. It's really not exciting to discover such. If you find the Democratic party of some state or county putting out flyers with Sarah Palin and her stripper pole, we could talk about equivalence. Instead we have nasty commentary--about a politician! quelle surprise!--but only one side putting out Obama bucks, or in Sacramento the inspirational "Waterboard Obama!" signs from their Republican Party headquarters. Look how much photoshopping the VA Republicans had to do with their photo of bin Laden to make him darker, less facial hair, etc. Only one side has a problem with death threats at their rallies.
You came into a blog post on offensive official Republican campaign literature and tried to turn the topic to "but Reagan won the Cold War, so we're good people." It's very telling that the people posting under variations of "Republican" have no defense of the actual topic of the post. Why not come up with a response for Sheila Raines, quoted at 11:12, who had been working to recruit non-whites into the Republican party and now has to live with the Obama buck?
Seriously...the disturbing thing is the campaign thinking voters will find this is as funny as they do. No consideration for the possibility of offending someone.
That is the danger of hyper-partisanship, and seperating yourself from those who think differently than you do. In the closing days of a campaign, a lot of thinking stops and tribalism sets in. When no one challenges you on your bullshit, things spin out of control.
Jane Hamsher made a fool out of herself during the Lieberman senate race and posted a very offensive thing thinking it was humorous. I think some people should get out more and experience things outside their comfort zone.
Asher - Last link in Ta-Nehisi's original post, "This is who they are"; it's an article by Ed Whelan.
The Left was wrong on the Soviet Union/communism. That's a pretty fucking big thing to be wrong about.
Yet somehow, in 2004, I ended up, after 20 years of being an independent, registering as a Democrat. Not sure if it was the arrest w/out charges, torture, censorship, unitary executive, or some combo of the above.
"You all care so much about gender, but you have such contempt and disdain for Sarah Palin. I'm not a supporter of hers, and think she is out of her league. But the venomous hatred directed at her by the left is appalling. When you all talk about how much you care for gender, why do you not seek to include women like Palin? Do you only care about gender when you are talking about liberals?"
I agree with others above who are not sure what the "venomous hatred" noted above is other than calling her pick a complete insult as she is clearly not ready for the job, out of her league, and someone who has been found to have abused her power in office. If she were a man, she would receive the same negative rating. See, Quayle, Dan and Nixon, Richard.
I thought Jim Jones with the Kool-Aid. I am so pathetically white I didn't realize it was a stereotype. (And remember, these are the same people who accuse Democrats of 'elitism.' What do they think poor white people drink, Chablis?)
One can also feel strong contempt and disdain for Sarah Palin because she's an utterly ignorant, unqualified, corrupt mess of a politician who would have been laughed out of McCain's selection committee if she were a man. This is not arguable.
In fact, it's the purest sexism to treat Sarah Palin as a shrinking violet done hard by The Mens and the Feminists. The same people who claim that we're 'pulling the race card' every time something like Curious George comes up are awfully eager to cry sexism when Palin's corruption, incompetence, and seeming inability to speak without a script come up.
That McCain and his campaign thought women would flock to this anti-choice control freak simply because she was female is the most sexist thing of all.
Oh, I see. Well, it may be in poor taste, but I don't know what's so exceptionable about Whelan's post. The fact simply is that, without the abortion bans that existed in the 60s, many people who went on to live fine lives wouldn't exist today. I could just as well say, "this is who liberals are," and link to any one of the many disgusting articles about why Palin's really a hypocrite because, after all, she tested her fetus for Down's and had the kid anyway, so, you see, she made a choice and yet would deny that choice to others, therefore making her a hypocrite. The point being that there are some pretty tacky arguments made on either side of this issue. Here's one:
http://www.salon.com/env/feature/2008/09/05/sarah_palin_down_syndrome/
Repub:
Why do republicans insist they were the only ones fighting the Cold War and Communism? The stupidity and/or dishonesty of the repubs is amazing.
What about Korea and Truman, Vietnam and Kennedy, then Johnson? And who did the actual fighting? There was a draft then, and you are a dishonest and disgusting moron to in effect claim the dead of those wars were exclusively republican.
Typical republican. Rewrite history to 'own' the credit for something they had little to do with.
Your St. Ronnie didn't end the Cold War or cause the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union failed in 1991 -- long after St. Ron -- for multiple reasons, most of them stemming from the inefficiencies of the economic system that supported it.
And by the way, Communism hasn't ended. What the hell do you think China is? It's a communist country, you freaking moron. One that now has most of our manufacturing jobs, our factories and machine tools, and now holds trillions of dollars against our national debt -- debt ran up to the trillions by your party of the so-called personally responsible and fiscal prudent.
Well, moron, let me tell you what your party does own all by themselves in your Cold War claims: The support for right-wing death squads and thuggish despots in central america, and the responsibility for the murders, the torture and the rapes of tens of thousands of people by these right-wing killers.
That's all yours, bud. You don't get to share credit for that.
One big thing. Many Republicans did not want to fight in WWII. Some of them were even pro fascists and pro-Hitler (see Prescot Bush). Okay history lesson over.
The left was wrong about communism? When was that in somewhat recent history? Because I'm 43 and while the left in my lifetime hasn't been as obsessed about communism as the repubs, I haven't seen any non-whackjob lefties being anything close to pro-communist. That's a Rush-level statement.
As to the original sin of the obamabucks, I come from a long line of racist assholes (on all sides of my family, and all generations including my own -- I'm bravely excluding myself here), and I don't think even they could , with a straight face, drop a fried chicken and ribs reference and pretend that they didn't know it was racist. And trust me, there are plenty of things that they do say that are completely racist and that they use that excuse for. But ribs and chicken and WATERMELON? Come on people. Nobody's that ignorant.
Oh, and on a lighter note, despite my grounding and steeping in relatively unrepentant racism growing up, I didn't know about the kool-aid thing. I guess my people weren't as good at the whole race-baiting thing as they thought. They definitely need to step their collective game up.
Oh, and when's Denny Green gonna run for office?? I think he should run for mayor here in san diego (though we've got a pro-gay marriage republican now, and perhaps we should hold on to that diamond in the rough). I'd love to see a politician step up and drop the "they are who we thought they were" line :).
Yawn,
I am reminded of two quotes the one is when Fredrick Douglass was given an apology by a white stage-coach driver for the company policy that forced him to ride shotgun (up with the driver in the cold) on a day when it was freezing and Douglass replied "They can never degrade the character of Fredrick Douglass." The second is Elanor Roosevelt "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
Damn straight. I'm not going to answer the trolls but I will say that a basic tenet of conservativism is the basic equality of everyone before the law. As such the race-baiters and the homophobes have no place in any sort of conservative movement. The homophobes and the race baiters belong with the rest of the reactionary movement somewhere on the fringes of society.
Regarding the dollar bill shown above. Meh. It reflects poorly on the taste and judgement of those who distribute such litterature, because in a nutshell "They can never degrade the character of Barack Obama." In the words of Douglas Adams these people are mostly harmless. The only thing that such literature destroys is the civic discourse required of an informed citizenry in a representative pluralistic society. However civic discourse has been on the decline since the days of Lyndon Johnson. To put all of this in a sentence, Strom Thurmond is already dead and after this election the Republican Party will be also.
Perhaps, One day, Conservatism will cease to be identified with bigots, and once again be semi-respectable.
Where does this stereotype come from, that black men like watermelon and fried chicken? I've seen and heard that over the years, and never really got it.
Go to Google Images and search for "black sambo." You'll get it.
waterloo:
More typical republican BS showcasing their reality distortion field in operation. It works like this: First, try to grab credit for anything that can be construed as positive by blatantly ignoring history. Exapmle: Repub's incredible BS claim of 'We fought the Cold War! We ended Communism!'.
Then, when called on the BS (Psst! Hey morons! What about Korea, Vietnam, Truman, Johnson etc?) we get another selective, history-ignorant BS assertion: 'Thank you, Democrats, for Korea and Vietnam.'
In this republican version of history, Nixon of course had nothing to do with Vietnam. And republicans had nothing to do with the wars in Granada, Panama and the secret and illegal involvement in most of Central America. And as for the death squads and the deals with terrorists to supply arms to these death squads, the Republican hands are clean, they had nothing to do with any of that, amirite?
Yeah, right.
You don't get to claim for republicans responsibility for any the positives of history, and then pretend they had no responsibility for any of the negatives of history. Especially for the Cold War.
Republicans: intellectually dishonest, arguably stupid, mostly racist. A real class act.
Oh and by the way, waterloo -- The U.S. has a worse infant mortality rate than even Cuba. Keep that in mind next time you want to make fun of the Cuban health care system. Moron.
No Newports? Tremendous oversight. And I agree with the Kool-Aid thing. Grape Soda, please.
When I was growing up, I was deeply offended by the title White Men Can't Jump. Why aren't there any movies called "Women Can't Tell Jokes", or "Jews Can't Play Football, Except for Jay Fielder (and even then...)".
What the hell is going on in this country?
Fiedler, natch! I'm sure Jay Fielder is just fine at football.
Saying "the left was wrong about Communism" is about as useful as saying "the right was wrong about Fascism." They're both the extremes of either ideology. It's not as though anything to the left of the middle belongs to Stalin, and anything to the right of the middle belongs to ... Mr. Godwin.
Oh and another thing for you Mr. Repub, excuse the fuck out of MLK for fighting for his own goddamn civil rights.
Why do racists think it is funny to stereotype blacks for liking ribs, fried chicken and watermelon? I am a very pasty white guy - I LOVE ribs and watermelon! I like fried chicken (not KFC) but prefer ribs. Kool Aid not so much. So you can bake fun of black people by pointing out that they like some mighty fine eats? Get me another slab.
Jews Can't Play Football, Except for Jay Fiedler (and even then...)".
Well-- Sid Luckman is in the Hall of Fame.
Why aren't there any movies called "Women Can't Tell Jokes"
Christopher Hitchens hasn't finished the screenplay yet.
Racism is funny. Omg. Check out how incredulous the woman interviewing these people gets. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/10/17/racist.obama.newsletter.kcal
But wait this group couldn't have been Republicans. John McCain said he repudiated any out of bounds attacks by Republicans. John McCain hasn't repudiated this group ergo this group can't be Republicans.
One thing I haven't figured out yet is why so many people have been claiming to be Republicans and launching out of bounds attacks on Barack Obama? I mean clearly since John McCain hasn't repudiated any of them none of them can be Republicans. Not sure how some of them even got to be Congressman with R's next to their names, must be some of that voter fraud they keep warning me about.
And perhaps someone should tell John McCain that there is a nefarious group of people out there saying they are his campaign staff and making out of bounds attacks. John, one of them even attacked Michelle Obama for working at a law firm wihtout knowing that Ayers wife worked there too. I mean clearly since John McCain didn't repudiate them they must not be his actual staff. He probably should check with his accountants and find out how all these people are getting access to his campaign funds.
emma, dear, calm down. No need to get all angry at me. Lighten up. Calm yourself. Restrain your feminine emotions.
I've read Letter from a Birmingham Jail at least 10 times. And I think if King were alive, while he would be ebullient about Obama's success, he would be very troubled by the consequences of leftism to the inner city. I also think he would denounce hip-hop as the shit that it (mostly) is.
I'm glad King fought for his own civil rights. I'm also glad that Reagan and others like him fought for the civil rights of those trapped behind the Iron Curtain. Let's not be so selfish, shall we?
tee-hee:Oh and by the way, waterloo -- The U.S. has a worse infant mortality rate than even Cuba. Keep that in mind next time you want to make fun of the Cuban health care system. Moron.
Funny. When I visit Puerto Rico, where some members of my family live, and I talk to the Cubans there who fled Castro, they don't talk much about the wonderful Cuban health care system. They talk about other, darker things.
Again this is just stupid. Black people eat delicious food. hahaha! You're an idiot!
All I have to say is those Black Republicans who are shocked and by this: Wake the f*** up! Black unemployment is still twice the average. And when they have no further use for you they'll be ridiculing you on Fox as you shuck and jive with your African brothers.
Your St. Ronnie didn't end the Cold War or cause the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union failed in 1991 -- long after St. Ron -- for multiple reasons, most of them stemming from the inefficiencies of the economic system that supported it.
That's not what Gorbachev said. He said years later (to George Shultz) that the turning point leading up to the end of the Cold War was the Reykjavik summit. Thank you Reagan.
Incidentally, the reason Gorbachev was chosen to lead the Soviet Union in the first place, despite being a reformer, is that the Party wanted someone who could confront Reagan. That's why they didn't pick an old apparatchik after Andropov and Chernenko.
If you really think that the Soviet Union collapsing in 1991 had nothing to do with what was going on in the 1980's, you weren't paying attention (or maybe you weren't born yet).
Read Sakharov. Read Solzhenytzin.
The Republican 'Obama-Bucks' flier both inflames and fatigues me, but, sadly, it does not surprise me.
While the obvious strategic aims of the GOP have normally been tied to some tangible policy idea (crime, welfare, etc.), the face of the most despised aspects of the policy have normally been 'painted black' or ensconced in some other 'un-American' cloth. Unfortunately, this uneven and pervasive racist approach only serves to bolster whatever negative stereotypes those within the 'base' and their fringe cohorts hold dear.
Using a black woman as the 'face of welfare' or a gay white guy as the 'new face of pedophilia' is both intellectually dishonest and morally reprehensible. But, even worse, it paves the way for hateful, 'playful' (and ignorant) ads like this by introducing hate into the public dialogue in a serious policy debate.
"Black unemployment is still twice the average."
And the fault of that belongs to whom?
I guess we need more affirmative action to get these people more jobs. Or maybe larger prisons.
When I visit Puerto Rico, where some members of my family live, and I talk to the Cubans there who fled Castro, they don't talk much about the wonderful Cuban health care system.
Yeah? And you think they're a good sample? My guess is that if you talked to leftists who had fled to Canada after the 2004 election, you'd hear some pretty dark shit about the US, too.
Would it be true? Some of it surely would be. Some of it would be the self-justification for the considerable effort it takes to leave one's homeland (especially to get from Cuba to Puerto Rico.)
If I recall it was Al Gore who first brought up Willie Horton. I think many Democrats at the time thought that it was a legitimate issue.
I've been keeping my attention for most of the day on "this is who we are." I especially loved Dave's 11:12 comment, delivering seven names without explanation. I'm not confident my kids know to sit and pay attention when those names start rolling, so I've been building a parenting plot for that.
Now I want to come back to "who they are." The stupid ugly "humor" of that mailer and the follow-up plea of ignorance look to me like a real phenomenon and one of the big ones. I wouldn't believe the woman who did that if I hadn't come across similar things repeatedly from high school and college kids.
They really are used to people chuckling at that sort of thing and they really haven't thought about the scale of disrespect it involves. They really haven't had the first flicker of a connection to other backgrounds, so they don't have the first glimmer of empathy to help them avoid making asses of themselves.
At a guess, at least 50 million white Americans live in ways that let them do this crap and be genuinely surprised if anyone tells them it stinks. It's why diversity in schools and colleges matters to me: it gives the white students a chance of figuring out the basics.
I wish great blessings on the African-American members of that Republican group. They're close enough to the white idiots to have a chance of getting a few of them to think this week. Maybe not to think hard, but at least to think and feel for a minute, and maybe so they'll remember at least once in a while to do it in the future when they see a chance to be "funny" again.
Chet, these people weren't lying.
The major thing they were fleeing was the perpetual control that the state had over their lives, and the constant suffocating fear.
How come no one here is talking about black racism, or black-on-black crime statistics?
All good people should condemn the racist attacks on Barack Obama, just like all good people should condemn Jesse Jackson's recent comments about Jews. We shouldn't be too concerned about WHICH minority group is the object of hate; we should be more eager to say no to hate wherever we find it. Of all people, both blacks and Jews should appreciate why this is a good idea.
History Major,
Yeah, the collapse of the Soviet Union was a great thing. That's why their life expectancies collapsed too, since 1990. I'm not a supporter of the Soviet empire by any means but only a moral retard would deny it contained some good as well as much evil, and in 1990 they threw out the baby with the bathwater.Reagan's foreign policy was all about advancing capitalism, a loathsome and evil system, no matter how many Nicaraguans, Salvadorans or Chileans had to die to do it.
Tay-Hay,
Of course those guys don't like the Castro regime, probably because they weren't allowed to indulge their greed the same way they are in the U.S. That's the whole reason they left. If you want to get a real picture of life in Cuba, best not to talk to the greedy and fascist Miami Mafia crowd.
"Reagan's foreign policy was all about advancing capitalism, a loathsome and evil system, no matter how many Nicaraguans, Salvadorans or Chileans had to die to do it." - Hector
Tell that to Violeta Chamorro. Do you recognize her name?
"capitalism, a loathsome and evil system"
Said the person using a computer. How did that computer come about? Through communism, socialism, or capitalism? How much was the government involved in inventing or perfecting the personal computer?
What kind of computer are you using? Have you sent the company, part of that loathsome and evil system, a thank you card yet?
That last hyperlink Ta-Nehisi has in his main post really needs to be read to be believed:
Former Fetus Barack Obama [Ed Whelan]
Nearly 48 years ago, a young woman, not yet 18, became pregnant in her freshman year of college. Living in a time and place in which abortion was generally illegal, she proceeded to marry the father of her child and gave birth to a son. Perhaps she would have done so irrespective of the abortion laws at the time, even if, say, she lived in a legal culture that celebrated abortion as a fundamental right. Very possibly not. (I haven’t found any statistics on the percentage of pregnant college freshmen who abort their pregnancies, but indirect indications suggest that it’s very high.)
Barack Obama may actually believe, as he stated yesterday, that Roe v. Wade “was rightly decided.” But it may be very lucky for him, as the son born of that woman, that it hadn’t been decided a dozen or so years earlier.
That Obama may owe his very life to a pre-Roe legal regime that banned abortion is, to be sure, not necessarily a reason that he should favor that regime (though I can’t help noting that Justice Thomas’s critics recklessly accuse him of hypocrisy for opposing racial-preference plans that they say he benefited from). But it ought to lead Obama and others to think more carefully about the valuable role that protective abortion laws play.
Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat, and the most racist president in 20th century American history. He forced African-Americans out of government employment in D.C.
Theodore Roosevelt, who invited African-Americans to dine with him, was a Republican.
History Major.
What you just said is a fallacy. It gets the facts right but it doesn't show any knowledge of cause and effect.
Woodrow wilson was born in Augusta Georgia not exactly the most racially tolerant place even today. (If you're ever there eat at the Blue Sky Kitchen.)
Teddy Roosevelt on the other hand homesteaded in North Dakota for a time. North Dakota while not known for its diversity is not exactly known for racial prejudice either.
Does the Term Dixiecrat mean anything to you?
The fact that you had to search back an entire century to find a relavent parallell shoows how little you actually know about the why's and wherefores (sorry to be redundant) of history.
It is unfortunate that "consitutional Principles" as a phrase has been a historic justification for racism.
Anyway not to engage the trolls any farther. I would like to ask, even though I agree with the sentiment expressed by TNC, what purpose does pointing out the obvious serve other than to make oneself feel superior to others?
Regards
Emma & sgwhiteinfla, I am loving ya'll today. On fire!
You don't have to "restrain" your "feminine emotions", let it flow, I say...
How much was the government involved in inventing or perfecting the personal computer?
Almost entirely. The first computer, colossus, was developed in Britain during World War 2 to break German codes. One of the other main applications for the computer was the calculation of artillery trajectories for the army.
Through the entire development of the computer, governments throughout the world (especially in the US) have spend vast sums of money on research and development for it. The internet was a developed from a DARPA project for developing robust networks.
If you want to make that point, the computer's the worst way to make it.
"This is what keeps African-Americans from joining the Republican Party," she said. "I'm really hurt. I cried for 45 minutes."
TR: As an independent conservative type I almost wish I could contact her. I feel so bad for this even if I had no role.
In this day and age I really believe both parties should be open to people of all races and people of all races should feel able to be whatever. If a white Democrat was intensely for Affirmative Action, Universal Healthcare, progressive taxation, and reparations for slavery I'd hope they wouldn't be seen as a "traitor" or someone who needs to "wake up." I have no idea why this Sheila Raines woman is a Republican, but it could be some principled reason from her perspective. It might not be, but I can't dismiss the possibility out of hand. She's apparently placed herself in a difficult position and thus far I feel much sympathy for her.
"That's not what Gorbachev said. He said years later (to George Shultz) that the turning point leading up to the end of the Cold War was the Reykjavik summit. Thank you Reagan."
So Reagan agreeing to arms control and not interfering with perestroika and glasnost was Reagan liberating Eastern Europe? That's silly. (Also, conservative Republicans were against what Reagan did there. George Will accused him of losing the Cold War at the time.) It was Gorbachev himself who instituted the necessary reforms. It was actual Eastern Europeans who took to the streets. Meanwhile under Reagan, we backed the Khmer Rouge insurgency against the Vietnamese puppet government in Cambodia. The puppets weren't good, but the Khmer Rouge made Stalin look like a puppy (plus there was the issue of the Khmer Rouge having committed aggressive action against Vietnam and killing off the entire Vietnamese minority in Cambodia). They were the absolute worst filth communism ever produced. Saddam Hussein's hero was Stalin and Reagan armed him while Reagan fought against Congressional attempts to denounce the anti-Kurd genocide. His allies in Central America committed genocide.
I don't deny Reagan his role, but he was not the world-changing superman people make him out to be. His role in the end of communism more than anything was that of an inspiration to a portion of people living under communism (but not to Vietnamese or Cubans or North Koreans or Burmese). However, as Gorbachev's translator's autobiography shows, Reagan was just another guy who was a vague cultural manifestation of the West for those under Soviet communism, such as John Lennon, who was also a huge inspiration to many living under Soviet communism. Reagan didn't invent zamizdat culture, after all, nor did he create the Thaw, during which reformers like Gorbachev and Yeltsin came of age. Even his more aggressive policies, such as supporting the mujaheddin in Afghanistan, were started under Carter.
Last of all, the Soviet economic collapse was in part based on the fact oil prices took a nosedive in the 1980's. Unless Reagan controlled the invisible hand of the market to drive down oil prices through sheer will and thus make a key Soviet export cheaper, you are placing way too much importance on a false great man of history narrative. It's no surprise even more respected conservative Reaganites don't speak Russian and haven't even gone through the translated Soviet archives when trying to make their point. The end of communism in Eastern Europe was about Eastern Europeans, not us. We aren't at the center of everything and it's tacky to try to take credit for everything.
Besides all this, there is no reason anti-communism forced Reagan into being so socially regressive at home. There was no need to demagogue over "welfare queens" and ignore HIV/AIDS.
"Meanwhile under Reagan, we backed the Khmer Rouge insurgency against the Vietnamese puppet government in Cambodia. The puppets weren't good, but the Khmer Rouge made Stalin look like a puppy (plus there was the issue of the Khmer Rouge having committed aggressive action against Vietnam and killing off the entire Vietnamese minority in Cambodia). They were the absolute worst filth communism ever produced."
Man, is your history fucked up. You don't know what you're talking about. The Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia in the 70's, before Reagan was President. We did not support the Khmer Rouge, we supported Prince Sihanouk, and then Lon Nol. The Chinese were the ones supporting the Khmer Rouge. But none of this had to do with Reagan. And to say that the KR made Stalin look like a puppy is ridiculous, when you consider the millions who died under the latter.
You give a lot of credit to Gorbachev. Fine. But why was he picked in the first place? Because the Soviet Politburo realized that needed a different kind of leader now that Reagan was President. That is what made the Party and the Politburo open to a reformer. Have you studied this?
The turning point was the Reykjavik summit because Reagan refused to give up on SDI. There was no chance for the Soviet Union to compete with us economically and militarily. Gorbachev realized that he had lost.
My neighbor across the street is Vietnamese (now a Vietnamese-American). He has expressed tremendous gratitude for Reagan's presidency, and I don't think that he is an outlier.
And what did you want Reagan to do about AIDS? Invent a vaccine? His Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, did a tremendous amount to confront the disease, and was well ahead of his time. (He was also an evangelical conservative.) So Reagan deserves credit for bringing in the right person, and letting him do his job. It was not Reagan's responsibility to cure diseases.
Concerning "welfare queens," there were more than a few.
It's a matter of some dispute. I'd heard that Reagan did support the "Khmer Rouge as rebel group" formed after their ouster, but if he did Carter apparently did as well. (Carter is seen as this saintly figure, but in point of fact Archbishop Romero's pleading letter about "stop arming people who are killing us" was sent to Carter during his Presidency)
I think in the 1980s many were uncertain what to do on AIDS and Reagan was probably not worse than any other politician or leader.
All that said Reagan did support some pretty vicious Latin American dictators in the name of anti-Communism. He is rightly honored by much of Eastern Europe, but the hostility to him in much of this hemisphere is probably also as fair. I'm something of a conservative so I'd see him as more positive than negative, but still fairly ambivalent. I also think the Republicans need to start "moving on" from him or risk becoming obsolete. It's understandable why they haven't, none of their Presidents since then have been as successful, but they need to try. Even Gingrich might be more "contemporary" of an image.
Ta-Nehisi, I'm legitimately disappointed in you on this one. It's not for calling an obvious bigoted gesture when you see it. It's because while you acknowledge the racism of the right, you ignore the condescension of the whole liberal "Stuff White People Like" crowd because their heart is in the right place. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and personally, I'd rather fight against someone who is diametrically opposed to me than someone who talks a good game, but when the rubber meets the road doesn't think that much different from the person who hates me. Simply put, I'd rather be hated than disrespected.
To be fair, the conservative movement is fundamentally bankrupt. A political philosophy that is fundamentally based on "oh...that's weird/disgusting/icky" is ultimately immature. That said, pretending to be superficially down with the people to score some political style points is just as worse, because the second I no longer become cool in ytheir perspective, there is little difference between you and David Duke but some punk rock music and some fucked-up looking clothes.
Ta-Nehisi, I'm legitimately disappointed in you on this one. It's not for calling an obvious bigoted gesture when you see it. It's because while you acknowledge the racism of the right, you ignore the condescension of the whole liberal "Stuff White People Like" crowd because their heart is in the right place. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and personally, I'd rather fight against someone who is diametrically opposed to me than someone who talks a good game, but when the rubber meets the road doesn't think that much different from the person who hates me. Simply put, I'd rather be hated than disrespected.
To be fair, the conservative movement is fundamentally bankrupt. A political philosophy that is fundamentally based on "oh...that's weird/disgusting/icky" is ultimately immature. That said, pretending to be superficially down with the people to score some political style points is just as worse, because the second I no longer become cool in their perspective, there is little difference between you and David Duke but some punk rock music and some fucked-up looking clothes.
No, the U.S. supported the Khmer Rouge insurgency against the People's Republic of Kampuchea for a decade after they were run out of Phnom Penh by the Vietnamese invasion in December 1978, not only with covert aid and intelligence through the government of Thailand, but also overtly - for one example, see:
http://books.google.com/books?id=mhkw4Psq0SQC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=khmer+rouge+un+us+ambassador&source=web&ots=aaQHpMZByf&sig=5fEzhPFeFA0SQ17TUTcE5tjQQkQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=8&ct=result#PPA28,M1
I know that's hard to believe. Research it yourself.
"You don't know what you're talking about. The Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia in the 70's, before Reagan was President. We did not support the Khmer Rouge, we supported Prince Sihanouk, and then Lon Nol. The Chinese were the ones supporting the Khmer Rouge. But none of this had to do with Reagan. And to say that the KR made Stalin look like a puppy is ridiculous, when you consider the millions who died under the latter."
You just made it obvious you don't know why there was a Vietnamese invasion which led to an anti-Vietnamese insurgency. Why would the KR have an insurgency when they were in charge? You've made it very clear you know little of Cambodia's history. Also, saying "the Chinese were the ones supporting the Khmer Rouge" is a bit odd because 1) the Thais also were rather friendly (with one high-ranking KR genocidaire still living extremely comfortably in Thailand and Thailand was often the conduit for our KR support) and 2) we were supporting the KR to please our new partners in Beijing against the pro-Moscow Vietnamese. Also, while Stalin piled up a higher body count, that was partly the result of ruling a huge empire over decades while Pol Pot ruled a nation of less than 10 million for less than half a decade. However, the intensity of violence relative to the population under the KR was probably the greatest of anything since the Holocaust, with IIRC the population of Cambodia being around 7 million before the KR took over and only around 4-5 million afterwards. After all, the entire nation was one large concentration camp where people were killed for wearing glasses or being literate.
"My neighbor across the street is Vietnamese (now a Vietnamese-American). He has expressed tremendous gratitude for Reagan's presidency, and I don't think that he is an outlier."
So a guy who doesn't live in Vietnam expresses gratitude for a president who didn't do anything for Vietnam and this is supposed to mean something? I'm Indian-American, but I'm against the US-India nuclear deal because I worry it harms American interests, but Indians in India tend to feel the deal is too tilted to American interests vis-a-vis Indian interests. For a history major, you don't seem to understand how to use evidence. A couple of anecdotes can make a narrative on paper but that doesn't make the narrative correct.
"All that said Reagan did support some pretty vicious Latin American dictators in the name of anti-Communism. He is rightly honored by much of Eastern Europe, but the hostility to him in much of this hemisphere is probably also as fair."
I think this encapsulates a lot of it.
"But why was he picked in the first place? Because the Soviet Politburo realized that needed a different kind of leader now that Reagan was President. That is what made the Party and the Politburo open to a reformer. Have you studied this?"
Yes, actually. If Spongebob Squarepants had become president, the Politburo would have to had to react to that too. That's what happens when the most powerful nation of the world competes with a one-party state in a bipolar world. The American policies that helped to weaken the Soviets started under Carter (supporting the jihad against the Soviet in Afghanistan, but also the disgraceful support of the KR) or earlier (after all, Kennan predicted how the Soviet Union would rot internally decades earlier and we had been pursuing containment for decades). When you also have two leaders die in quick succession as the older generation ages in the midst of multiple crises (from Afghanistan to oil prices dropping), you are going to have to find a new type of leader.
"The turning point was the Reykjavik summit because Reagan refused to give up on SDI. There was no chance for the Soviet Union to compete with us economically and militarily."
If you take Soviet military spending pre-Reagan and then project it into the future, it closely matches what the Soviets actually spent during the 1980's on missiles and such. SDI is a red herring that conservatives like to latch on to to give the Cold War victory all to Reagan. Considering how much Reagan gave up with regards to arms control in Iceland, putting so much importance on high spending on a failed technology just looks desperate and just reflects poorly on the person making the argument. I don't deny Reagan played a role in ending the Cold War, but you seem to be placing it all on his shoulders in a way very unbecoming of a history major giving any historical figure credit for anything, especially when you consider the only policy of substance you can point to that had a lot of Reagan's fingerprints all over it is SDI. History is not the story of great men deciding to change the world through sheer willpower and not blinking. Often things like oil price spikes and plummets play a bigger role.