I they're they're all racist, including that troutmouthed brother at the end. Uhhh, if they are trying to make a point about not being racist, then why pull the Jedi Mind Trick of ending the video with a sad looking black man?
Who are we kidding? This sh*t is racist.
This is yet another reason why the GOP so epically fails. The ad sights two unrelated instances (Jesse Jackson vs Artur Davis and Jimmy Carter vs the TeaBaggers), and takes both completely out of context as the basis of their pointless point. Seriously, who (if anyone) and when, has the healthcare debate been discussed in any "racist" terms? I might be crazy, but most of what I've seen play out has been a strictly a war of Big Gubb'ment/No Gubb'ment ideology.
I am assuming these
Of course this would never happen. The party leadership is too chickensh*t to be concerned with policing their own racist supporters, for fear of alienating these very voters come 2010. It's a lot easier to do a lil' Psychological Projection, and somehow turn the tables on the other side, thereby accusing them of being racist for merely pointing out the fact that many of your supporters are racist. It's a pretty clever trick, but unfortunately people with half a brain can figure it out. Sure, it'll "energize the base", but in case you ain't notice, that base is shrinking.
Don't fall for the okey doke, people.
Question: What's your read on this latest GOP tactic of alienating 75% of America to gain 25%?
Rachel Maddow Takes On 'I Guess I'm Racist' Ads [HuffPost]
Got News? Email AB
The Average FAQ
Just Who Is AB?
Posts
38 AverageComments™:
For once in my life I shall be unqualifying and unambiguous:
Those who put together this video are horrible people. Period.
Not because they're necessarily racist (whether they are or aren't isn't the point), but because they are knowingly exploiting American faultlines and fanning flames that other, better people spend their lives trying to douse.
Disgusting.
AB, you are SO right about the projection thing. (If I had a psychology education under my belt, I would write a whole book purely on the subject of projection pertaining to Obama. That alone could fill up a set of encyclopedias...)
What's my read, you asked? You summed it up perfectly, throughout the post and especially at the end: it's the "latest GOP tactic of alienating 75% of America to gain 25%." Precisely. Incredibly. Stoopidly.
I'm surprised they didn't slap a rouged, rogue cameo at the end: "I'm Sarah Palin, and I approve this message. Not that I would ever admit to being a racist. No siree, not me, bucko. I find dark people very useful."
I guess attacking the health care plan on a reverse guilt "Im a racist" propaganda instead of debating the true role of government is why the GOP fails. This is classic race bating at it's worse. Let drum up this fictional notion that those who oppose the president health care plan are racist so they can play the reverse racism card. No wonder that even that the Dems approval ratings levels are abyssal the GOP's are worse
How about this as an idea, debate the idea that there is no funds to pay for this big government program with out eventually raising taxes on the middle class instead of race baiting. I would just like to see for once some honesty in politics.
Here's the problem (it's a little mathy): sure, you alienate 75 percent of the people to get 25 percent. But of those 75 percent, maybe only 30 percent actually vote or even know what the f*ck is going on. The 25 percent of crazy idiots they worked to secure delivers near-100-percent turn-out. You just need to trick or confuse a few of the alienated originals, maybe have Diebold help you steal few votes, and you're golden. Pack your shit, because it's going to be President Dobbs and Vice President Palin.
The GOP couldn't NOT do this even if it wanted to. It may well turn out to be smart, politically. Say what you like about the GOP, but they know how to fight the political battle.
@ Shady:
This could go one of two ways. Either
(1. It all plays out like most predict and fringe crowd will only further marginalize the GOP,
OR!
(2. The Fringers will stir up so much populist anger that they'll land themselves in power---and completely destroy Barack Obama in the process.
More and more, I'm worried about that second possibility.
I hate to admit it, but it's starting to feel like AB was right about Obama's election being the worst thing to happen to race relations in a long time. And how perverted is that?! Gotta hand it to 'em---the fringers have really accomplished something remarkable there.
So was this a commercial on TV? I don't have TV anymore so I don't see the commercials. Somebody somewhere is trying to be clever, but it just sounds ridiculous. It's the distraction form of argument tactic. Shift the focus to something that gets folks all riled up and then they won't be able to rationally consider the real problem.
I don't know what's worse: the tabloid newstream or these silly commercials.
...how about that one commercial that has a mom in a grocery store worried about taxes on soda and other junk food?
Question for everyone: how would you rather they respond to repeated accusations from all quarters that racism is the driving force.. not a fringe but the main explanation behind the summer Te Party protests?
In answering, you should remember that your comments here are archived with google, and I've called several of you out numerous times for blanket accusations.
So, if not this, what? Tell me what WOULD work, instead of re-hashing the same old conservative hateration.
@AB
"Seriously, who (if anyone) and when, has the healthcare debate been discussed in any "racist" terms? I might be crazy, but most of what I've seen play out has been a strictly a war of Big Gubb'ment/No Gubb'ment ideology."
Actually Senator Reid has thrown the racist/sexist shot across the bow.
Reid: "“You think you've heard these same excuses before?” Reid said during remarks on the floor of the Senate. “You're right. In this country there were those who dug in their heels and said, 'Slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough' — about slavery.”
Now granted the commercial is a little lame, but if the Dems are going use a lame comparison to those who opposed slavery, then what are the Reps to do?
@ Spool32
You can't seriously tell me you think this sort of underhanded strategery is actually intellectually honest. Can you?
I never thought "racism" was the main reason behind those Tea Party protests. I did find the timing and inherent condtradiction odd, but I chalked this up mostly to people being riled up by Conservative talkers. Those folks might have some legitimate points, but the timing, and the apparent agreement with those among their ranks who DEFINITELY were doing some racist sh*t was what stuck out most.
Heck, if you reread Carter's quote, you'll see even he loads his statement with disclaimers. So, I don't think the Tea Partiers have ever been exclusively about race.
The dishonest thing is using two completely unrelated examples (Jackson/Carter) to try and advance a point. Throwing race into the equation (uh, yeah, the GOP does, albeit for different reasons) makes zero sense if you're talking about Healthcare reform.
Again, this is a regrettable tactic, much like Harry Reid equating HC reform with slavery. There's just no need to go there if your core arguement (ie: we don't need no stinkin' HC reform, although we are unemployed) is strong enough.
As I said, when all else fails, do some hoe shit. And this ad, my friend, is some hoe shit.
@ ch55x
Yeah, that "sodas" commercial was just dumb. And I don't like the idea of a soda tax either, but playing the "clueless Mom who is concerned about the direction of our country because her Diet Coke is now 2 cents more per case" was just stupid. Again, more hoe shit. Seems like the GOP is pretty good at that.
@ Marbles
I speaks the troof, my man. Obama getting elected was the worst thing to happen for race relations since the 60's. It's obviously not his fault, it's ours.
@ Ethnic Ave
Great point.
@ Molly
Yes, this commercial has been airing here in the DC area on local TV, and I think nationally on Fox News.
Trying to hold ads to some standard of integrity is futile. If we did then my station wagon would make flowers grow in its wake.
That being said, there are 20 people shown in this ad. 16 of them are white or look white. This sums up the denial of the GOP. They believe that 4/5ths of America is white. They are using a majority of white actors to talk to white voters. (Watch the ad again with no sound and just look at the races of the people.)
It's also why they can't see the irony and fallacy of their platform. If all you are is white and all you project and see is white, then you think your world, your country, is white.
But it ain't.
Thank the lord.
@Spool
Perhaps those who oppose health care reform and are not racists should publicly distance themselves from those who go to these rallies with signs suggesting the the president is a some sort of undocumented muslim terrorist/monkey. Just a thought.
Even you must admit that their timing stinks.
@ Spool:
Yes, many were saying that racism was the main reason behind the Tea Parties. I never agreed, but I thought it played a major role (though more in subtle, unconscious ways than in "I don't want no darkies runnin' MY country!" stuff.) And there are the lazy conservative-flip-siders who say "Anyone who opposes Obama is a racist!" But here's the thing---no one cares what THEY have to say. They have no traction. The stuff this video represents is coming from these projecting types who think they're pre-empting the "you're racist" argument. THEY made this about race. If they hadn't, it would have just been a few scattered baiters painting Obama as a victim of the white man, and everyone else would have ignored them.
Also, who has actually said that the healthcare debate, specifically, has anything to do with race? Again, more "pre-emption."
But you have to admit that given the behavior of both the GOP and the grassroots over the past nine months, casual, nonpolitical observers could hardly be blamed for drawing those kinds of conclusions.
@ MsNegroEsquire:
"Perhaps those who oppose health care reform and are not racists should publicly distance themselves..."
If this were a healthy political culture, I would say it's unfair to expect something like that. But the reality is that extremism is increasingly the mainstream voice of American conservatism and has been increasingly so for many years.
@ Ethnic:
President Dobbs wouldn't scare me so much. Perhaps partly because I'm sure he would never tolerate having Palin on the ticket. XD
@spool,
"Question for everyone: how would you rather they respond to repeated accusations from all quarters that racism is the driving force.. not a fringe but the main explanation behind the summer Te Party protests?"
I think this is what the protesters should answer that this ad does not: if your opposition isn't about racism, then what IS it about? I agree with Wave that there hasn't been enough of that going around.
Honestly, after thinking about it, I believe that MOST of the opposition to HC reform isn't racist, but SOOOOO much of the demonstration of that opposition has been racist. And truthfully, that's a problem. And this silly ass spot does nothing to address that problem.
Can you oppose Obama and not be racist? Sure! But why does the opposition come in the form of accusations of "black reparations", "taking my country away from me", wild claims of socialism (a scare word that's LONG been used for black leaders) AND fascism, photos of Obama as some sort of voodoo witch doctor, protests where guns are A-OK, but Rosa Parks signs will get your ass beat, Medicare recipients crying about the government taking over their HC (WTF?!?), accusing Obama of wanting to kill your grandmother?
The whole fight could truly be about big government. I've actually enjoyed your perspective on the debate, and have been inclined to agree with some points. But it's precisely because this is not the insane bullshit that you use to make your points.
wow. this. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/gallery/2009/12/best-boss-ever-michael-steele-the-rnc-interns.php?img=1
Jimmy Carter's comments were about the GENERAL animosity toward President Obama. They did not specify health care reform.
This is just more bullshit from the insurance companies to try to fool working people into opposing healthcare reform.
They'll do ANYTHING to protect their profits. Including playing the race card, to try to divide us.
I guess if being in favor of universal health care makes me a bomb tossing Islamo-Commie-Faggot,then I'm a bomb tossing Islamo-Commie-Faggot.
What really burns my britches about this ad btw,is the license it gives people to proudly declare themselves racist.It seems to me that the GOP has been working for sometime now-on some level-to bring their most base instincts out in the open.
Did anyone notice that none of the white, Asian, or Hispanic people in the ad had a southern accent? Just the first African American guy did.
I'm white and from central Illinois; while I know that not all white southerners are racist, I still hear it when I hear a white person with that accent. I wonder if that had anything to do with choosing the "actors" for this ad?
This is *only* slightly off topic but addresses a wide swath of some of these comments.
Question: Do you really think, the GOP has some kind of smoke-filled Star-Chamber (1980's movie reference) where they sit around and plot the demise of the Black Race?
Do you really think this is the *only thing* on their mind.
Second question: How much would you accomplish if you stopped worrying about race every time someone disagrees with your religion (Barack) or things related to it?
The commercial is a reflection (or, reverse) of what many of you think and how you think. (Everything is racist except me and people I agree with politically)
And thats why even though it was F'ing poorly executed it was effective anyway.
@ Daedalus:
Do you see the same blog I see? I can't think of a single person here for whom "Barack" is their "religion." Not one. The attitude I pick up around here in general is one of patient skepticism.
(Granted, a lot of people are patiently skeptical about God, but whatever.)
The mentality you touch on is a major pet peeve of mine---where it seems to be suggested that white Republicans (or ALL white people, depending on who's talking) love to sit around plotting the demise of black people, rubbing their hands together and laughing evilly. I call it flipside-white conservatism, since it's really just a mirror image of its enemy. This commercial was made by people who thrive on victimology, love to play the race card, and thrive on fanning the flames of division. Sound familiar? My point.
Who around here has indicated they seriously think like this? Who has indicated they think opposition to health care reform automatically equals racist? No one, that's who.
@Marbles:
Three quick examples:
Janeane Garofalo says it on MSNBC
The Senate Majority Leader says it on the floor of the chamber during debate.
This one is especially egregious because he's not talking to protesters, he's talking to Senate Republicans. Meanwhile, the only sitting member of the Senate who remembers filibustering civil rights is Democrat Robert Byrd.
Rasmussen polled the question in mid September... they found some interesting numbers. 35% of black Americans think most of the President's opponents are racists. Only 39% of Democrats reject the notion that most of the opponents are racist.Overall, 22% of Democrats think most of the opposition is racist.
BTW, I seriously think this. I think people believe I'm a racist because I oppose the President. Polls and the leader of your party in the Senate agree. The Speaker of the house disagrees, though... she thinks we're all Nazis.
@ill:
The people who've been punched, beaten, kicked, had their heads bashed into the ground and, in one case, his finger BITTEN OFF have all been Conservative protesters, attacked by liberals (mostly union thugs sent to disrupt the protests). No one has been shot despite many many firearms legally carried. All the violence has been on the LIBERAL side of this question...
.. yet neither Marbles nor anyone else who claims the violent fringe is in control of the right wing will speak to the problem. Somehow, violent deeds are less worrying than scary words.
@MsNegroEsquire:
Talk about moving the goalposts. What does "undocumented Muslim terrorist" have to do with race? Not that I disagree, but you're a bit far afield.
The problem with your argument Spool is it does not address the clearly race bating in this ad. The cleverness of this ad is the way it tries to deflect some of the ugliness that we saw at the Tea parties with the monkey signs, African witch doctors, ect.
Here in lies the problem with the right vs left negativity. Folks become so partisan they can't admit that it was wrong to portray GW as Hitler. Also on the other hand folks on right can reasonably admit that its wrong to portray the first black president as a monkey considering the history behind that.
You are certainly right that Reid was race baiting with that comment but as the old saying goes two wrongs don't make it right. The GOP would be well better off with making the case that non-partisan case that big government has never been a positive instead of displaying the president as a monkey, Hitler, ect.
@Spool
"undocumented Muslim terrorist" is an evolution of the argument used against blacks and other racial minorities for many years. To many people at these rallies Obama is an "other", therefore he must "prove" himself to be a "real American." He must prove his birth, prove his Christianity, and prove that his motives are honorable. While "real Americans" are always "honorable Christians." I don't recall Dick Cheney ever having to produce his certificate of birth or his "honor."
I don't recall Dick Cheney ever having to produce his certificate of birth or his "honor."
And even more to the point, I don't remember any concerted election-season challenges of the true American-ness of the candidate who really was born outside the U.S. -- John McCain.
@ Spool:
Because those violent deeds are scattered, disparate, and most importantly, not the product of any organized system or ideology. (There is also at least one case where the circumstances were highly suspicious---can't remember the details but the black guy who got roughed up was clearly not being entirely candid)
You and I cannot seem to get over the particular disagreement regarding the consequences of the BRAND of rhetoric that has become mainstream on the right. Historically, it has had terrible consequences (not just in America but in places like Rwanda. Yes, I'm going there. Rwanda was an extreme example but the bilge spouted by some people here is nothing but the same stuff diluted).
Your description of what Pelosi said is really reaching. We both know what she was talking about. We both know that there have been hundreds of signs depicting Obama as Hitler.
We also both know that the same was true of Bush. I never condoned that. But here's the thing---at least with Bush, the Hitler-shriekers could justify their signage by citing Bush's unprovoked wars of (for what was for all the world) aggression. What, exactly, do these anti-Obama people have? A funhouse-mirror misunderstanding of what Nazism was actually like, at best.
Regarding the racism thing---honestly, I have to say that my eyes have been opened, to a certain extent, in the past year. While I rightfully bristle at being stereotyped and despise race-hustlers, I have been amazed at the intense, militant ignorance displayed by too many white Americans on virtually every aspect of race relations. I believe it's a minority of people, but it's a larger minority than I would have thought before. I mean damn---I may not know much, but at least I KNOW I don't know. Just scrolling through the comments on any news story even tangentially related to black America is an emotionally wearing experience---and if that's true for ME, I can't imagine how it feels for most people here. (I read an article on WashingtonPost.com about "The Princess and the Frog," and let's just say I came away with a shocked and lowered opinion of the Post's readership.)
My point is that, irrational childish though it may be, it's increasingly easy for me to see why people are so willing to believe most of Obama's opposition is racist.
Especially when virtually every aspect of American politics has become borderline infantile to begin with.
@wave:
Well said, and I agree. Firstly, just on a messaging level, the GOP can't turn these accusations back on the accusers through mockery yet. It's better to do straight denial (see Steele's line about how the stress has clearly gotten to Reid for saying some crazy shit like that).
Secondly, it's the right thing to do regardless of whether it earns votes.
@MsNegroEsquire
Cheney had three decades of service to the nation as his proof. Obama had half of a term in the Senate and a longtime friendship with a cop killer. So yeah, he's got more to prove.
@macon:
Fun with selective amnesia!
In fact, identical lawsuits were pending against McCain in three jurisdictions, asserting he is not a 'natural born citizen'. One was ruled against, the others were dropped when he lost the election.
@marbles:
I honestly burst out laughing when you suggested that attacks by the SEIU weren't organized! Not only were they the product of an organized system or ideology, they are the freakin poster child for violent, organized ideological systems.
Let's quickly review here, yet again:
Rightwing rhetoric over the last year produces:
offensive, sometimes racist signs
people carrying guns
loud, angry protests
Leftwing rhetoric over the same period:
Congressional leaders equate opposition with racism, Nazi-ism, and murder
multiple beatings by union thugs
guy's finger bitten off
Basically, your position boils down to "it might be worse later" and you point to places where it was. I'll walk down this path with you, because the lefthand side of it is littered with regimes where your progressive rhetoric has ended just as badly. Wouldn't it be more useful, though, to simply admit that the real acts of political violence are coming from the left? At this point, carrying a gun to a protest is insurance against getting an asskicking from the local Teamsters. It's time to refocus toward actual deeds rather than inflated bogeyman possibilities.
By the way, the 'highly suspicious' attack was on Ken Gladney, and charges have finally been filed against his attackers
spool wrote,
@macon:
Fun with selective amnesia!
In fact, identical lawsuits were pending against McCain in three jurisdictions, asserting he is not a 'natural born citizen'. One was ruled against, the others were dropped when he lost the election.
spool, my memory is not at all "selective."
I wrote above, "I don't remember any concerted election-season challenges of the true American-ness of the candidate who really was born outside the U.S. -- John McCain."
Compared to the supposed "controversy" continually trumped up around Obama's place of birth, the three lawsuits you mentioned received a minuscule amount of media attention, and relatively little support compared to the concerted challenges to Obama's place of birth. Three relatively ignored lawsuits does not a "concerted" effort make.
(So much for the idea of a "liberal" media.)
The point is, McCain's whiteness was a primary factor that saved him from the kind of suspicion and scrutiny on this issue that Obama had to endure. You can keep your white blinders on and deny that all day long, but that won't make it any less true.
@ Spool
We're on the same page about one thing. Reid's ignoramus "HC = Slavery" comment should have been roundly criticized by the Dems. I don't recall reading any such pushback.
"Cheney had three decades of service to the nation as his proof. Obama had half of a term in the Senate and a longtime friendship with a cop killer. So yeah, he's got more to prove."
That comment is so incredibly silly it doesn't even merit a proper response.
Also, McCain's "birther" lawsuit was bought by a member of the Independent Party if I'm not mistaken. And you can't possibly tell me you saw thousands of people taking to the streets with PANAMANIAN COMMUNITY ORGANIZER!!! signs, or a "birther" controversy following Mr. McCain for weeks on end, can you?
Eff' outta here.
Gladney was NOT assaulted, did you see what the "assailants" were actually charged with?
Misdemeanor ordinance violations.
Anyone with two eyes could see that guy merely rolled on the ground, then jumped up and got fitted for a neckbrace. Wonder if the teabaggers who used him as a mascot chipped in on those fictitious medical bills. Prolly not.
Spool, you are just making this too easy, man. Seriously.
Hah!
To begin... *clears throat* DEEEZ NUTS!
Now then:
I stand my my comment to Esquire. Dragging Dick Cheney into this, of all the random people, merits as silly a response as I can muster.
Re: Gladney, could be you're right, I guess we'll see. The whole episode illustrates the insanity going around, but the main point still stands here: the people doing the violence are the progressives and the unions. The people being called out for violence aren't engaging in any.
Look, you can go back 20 years and see this pattern the whole time. When was the last time the federal government actually shot somebody over ideology? Waco, TX. Before that it was Ruby Ridge, where during a standoff with Dangerous Rightwing Types at a cabin in the middle of nowhere, an FBI shooter killed an unarmed woman holding an infant.
The people DOING the violent things are progressives and Democrats. Look at it this way. There aren't even any hoaxes involving a Republican punching some poor progressive counterprotester. Even if Gladney's assault was faked, he's the faker in a bunch of real attacks... yet somehow they get a constant pass on this.
re: Macon, McCain, and birthers
It would have happened if he'd won. Remember "Selected, not Elected"? Of course not. More selective amnesia? It would have happened just as loudly and for just as long.
And, of course, here's macon calling me a racist. White blinders? Please. Thanks for outing yourself as one of the 35%, at least I know where I stand. Obama got scrutinized because he was NEW, not because he was black. See also: Sarah Palin.
@ Spool:
Ah, so it's union goons we're talking about. No surprise there---the story of unions has been a bloody one, with organizers both handing out and receiving the blows. For every union goon with brass knuckles, there was a union buster with his own set.
SEIU lackeys beating up on people are little more than subterranean thugs. End of story. But so far, I've been able to come across only two incidents---Gladney's and the woman in St. Louis. Neither is the result of an organized campaign of violence.
If the goons who beat up Gladney get punishment, you'll get no complaint from me. I was just saying that the guy appeared to be playing up his injuries for the cameras and distorting the events somewhat.
And the fears expressed are more than "bogeyman" possibilities. The murder of Dr. Tiller and that Holocaust museum guard are only the most recent examples of this rhetoric's results. Not to mention that attack on those police officers a few months back. And you've heard it a million times, but boredom with repeition doesn't make Oklahoma City any less true.
@ macon d:
"White blinders?"
Diplomacy, sir, diplomacy.
Or else it's war!!! XD
See what you did there? Rather than simply call out the violent actors, you switch to the passive voice... "the story... has been a bloody one..." and then dive straight into a straw-man moral equivalence. Why not just cop to the fact that there are no union busters in this equation?
Hell, it was the President who told his supporters to go out and "get in their faces" and, at an SEIU rally, said that people should "punch back twice as hard" against healthcare protesters.
Re: Tiller, the act was roundly and universally condemned by the Republican party and its membership. Trying to claim this sort of thinking is "mainstream" in the GOP is, frankly, a bunch of crap.
As for the Holocaust museum attack... well, Rev. Wright can tell you all about the unpleasant alliance between white supremacist conspiracy theorists and leftwing joooo-haters. Again, this is not in the mainstream, even "increasingly".
By the way, increasing from what to what? 0 to 0.1? Weasel words, dude. You brain better than that!
OKC was triggered by Waco and Ruby Ridge. Reno's BATF was far over the line... when the fringe thinks you're out to get them, and then you prove 'em right, bad things happen.
The fringe thinks progressives are out to get them. Are they right again?
@ Spool:
No weasel words. I brought up union-busters to emphasize the history of violence associated with organizing, and why it thus doesn't surprise me very much. There are no excuses for this behavior, but there's a reason some corners of the union world became the way they are. And the descendants of those reasons are the ones out there right now creating paranoid hysteria.
Let's get something clear---I will NEVER look for reasons to not call out violence. Violence is violence. That's it.
"Re: Tiller, the act was roundly and universally condemned by the Republican party and its membership. Trying to claim this sort of thinking is "mainstream" in the GOP is, frankly, a bunch of crap."
No.
Sorry, but I'm not letting that go. You won't of course, catch actual legislators shooting their mouths off QUITE that viciously, but the lines have been blurring for many years. Put it this way. By welcoming the support of the Teabag types for the last three decades, the GOP has created a monster they can no longer control. Extremism is the new normal. The pure, undiluted product comes from the GOP's increasingly disillusioned Teabag base, who have done more than anyone to create the toxic environment we enjoy. Through the inevitable osmosis that results from such support, the GOP has become a party of rhetorical extremists. The GOP had it in their power, during the 1990s, to seal this stuff off. But instead they exploited it and rode its coattails. So while I won't go so far as to call their denouncements "crocodile tears," I will say that it is them refusing to own the beast they've helped create.
If far-left communistic whackos had had several violent oubreaks during the Bush years, it would be much less implicative of the American left because a rhetorical culture of violence is no longer the norm. (in the '60s and '70s, obviously the situation was a bit different.)
And before you call a time out for relativism, recall that I find the crowd at Democratic Underground, for the most part, overly vicious. If that vibe were as common on the port side as it is on the starboard, I'd be singing a different song.
"By the way, increasing from what to what? 0 to 0.1? Weasel words, dude. You brain better than that!"
What is that referring to?
these ads are stupid. They are an out and out manipulation of your emotional response. As far as I know, no serious politician or commentator has called those that oppose healthcare reform racists. Instead, we've called them crooked (many of them are taking money from the healthcare lobbyists). We've called them ill-informed because they have believed in death panels. Finally, we've called them corporatists because they support corporations over the American people.
@ecthompson:
Incorrect, as you can see from the links I posted. And just today in the Washington Post, Ezra Klein writes that Lieberman is “willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in order to settle an old electoral score.” Now we're not just racists, we're MASS MURDERERS.
Marbles, reply to follow. For reference, the 'increasingly' term is from your post: "But the reality is that extremism is increasingly the mainstream voice of American conservatism"
@ Spool:
Klein's wording may be carefully chosen for hyperbolic effect, but factually, there isn't much you can say against it.
Post a Comment