1. Politicians are ugly, ugly people.
2. I don't know if it's better or worse that Glenn Beck claims he didn't even know Martin Luther King delivered the I Have a Dream Speech on August 28th at the Lincoln Memorial when he scheduled his rally on August 28th at the Lincoln Memorial. That seems like it should be a 4th of July or December 7th or April 9th sort of date for Americans. I've had a tough time figuring out what I think on this. Ex ante, I can't figure out a good reason why this is inappropriate or why Beck shouldn't do this. But I have a strong suspicion that something will be done or said there that will make it inappropriate. He claims it will not be used to demagogue, and who are we to stop someone that makes that claim? But in all likelihood it will be used to demagogue and the worst part is, to his ears it won't even sound like demagoguing so when people criticize him for it he'll develop even more of a martyr complex than he already has.
So, the question is, should it bother us just as much when Obama engages in demagoguery? See for example, the recent claims about how Republicans are going to "privatize" SSI. I'm no fan of Beck, but I do think that criticism of Beck is many ways rather selective in nature.
ReplyDelete1. I have not followed Republicans on SS recently. This sort of thing has been on the table in the past. Is this demagoguery? Is a difference of opinion demagoguery?
ReplyDelete2. I think questions of race and society are somewhat different than questions of federal programs. If Glenn Beck gets up on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on August 28th and makes a speech about race in America and claims that the President has a problem with white people, that would and should bother us considerably more than the President claiming that Republicans want to privatize SS. Can you honestly disagree?
I think it is very clear that outside of a couple of Republicans (like Paul Ryan) that SSI privatization is off the table. Which means that it is off the table. That Obama would try this tactic illustrates just how desperate the Democrats have become regarding the 2010 mid-term elections.
ReplyDelete"I think questions of race and society are somewhat different than questions of federal programs."
Frankly, I do not. To be blunt, most questions of "race and society" are smokescreen efforts for political purposes. Witness Harry Reid's efforts to tar Republicans with the racism epithet* ... when we all know that if Reid actually gave $0.02 about the plight of illegal immigrants that he - as majority leader of the Senate - could of course introduce legislation to deal with the issue. Of course, neither Reid nor Obama (despite a vigorous campaign pledge by the latter) are going to do that ... they are going to grouse about Republicans and sit on their hands.
*Not like the whole "maybe the 14th Amendment was a bad idea" line of reasoning out of some Republicans isn't helping their cause.
"...that would and should bother us considerably more than the President claiming that Republicans want to privatize SS."
ReplyDeleteOr let's put it this way; the story below is vastly more important than anything Glenn Beck does.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/16/opinion/la-ed-leaks-20100816
Race is an Orwellian political tool, pure and simple. From the beginning of Obama's presidential campaign to today, unfounded accusations of racism have been used to shut down debate and to discredit anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies, since after all anyone who disagrees with Obama could only do so because of racial intolerance. That's why Obama was the perfect choice for the Presidency for his Wall Street puppetmasters. Their aim was to create a non-issue to use to silence everyone on real issues. And it's been largely effective. I remember watching an episode of Real Time with Bill Maher in which Janean Garofalo claimed that anyone who disagreed with Obama was a racist, and of course the media never mentions that there are black people in the tea party. The media certainly made quite a fuss about the "racist" protesters who brought guns to an Obama speech, even though they were cooperative and peaceful and one of those men WAS BLACK. It just disgusts me. Does racism exist? Yes, it does, among people of all races, not just white people, but it continues its decline in America, thank God, now at all-time lows, and the political focus should be on real issues and not on phantom racism. And it should also be remembered that Obama is merely Bush with a darker complexion; he, like his predecessors, does NOT have the American people's best interests at heart, so we should stop pretending that we can expect otherwise.
ReplyDeleteBarbarossa - I'm not sure how you expect me to respond to all that. There is some bad commentary out there, sure. You seem to be conflating that with what most of the people opposed to the Tea Party think. I don't really see evidence of that. It certainly doesn't make sense to hold up, for example, Jean Garofalo as being representative. Can you think of any besides her? The NAACP's statement certainly didn't call the movement as a whole racist - in fact it took pains not to say that.
ReplyDeleteWhat frustrates me is that this seems like something of an invented story by the media. Almost all of the "is the Tea Party racist?" debate I hear goes on in conservative media outlets, with ocassional echoes on the far left. How exactly do you expect me to react to that? Like I said with Beck, I'm not going to feed into your martyr complex.
Contrast the NAACP's statement with Mark Williams's response then try to tell me the Tea Party is deserving of any sympathy on this issue.
ReplyDeleteA group of people that make Nazi references, totalitarian references, communism references, make accusations of anti-Americanism and object to the freedom of Americans to practice their religion should be able to brush off the occasional Jean Garofalo. And I didn't even mention the actual and obvious instances of racism and violence that there have been - I'm just referencing the broader, more widely based failings of the Tea Party.
*that last one is an "if the shoe fits, wear it" statement. If you think they should build the mosque, good for you. If you think that Obama is not a socialist, good for you. If we're going to talk about broad groups you have to mention these things. You can't just pretend the group as a whole doesn't have these defining elements simply because major portions of the group don't have these defining elements.
ReplyDeleteDaniel,
ReplyDeleteNot to defend the TPers, but what actual instances are you referring to? As with parade of terribles which bedwetters about terrorism attempt to use as a means to justify their positions, most of the accusations against the TPers have turned out to be much less than what the accusers make them to be.
The problem with the TPers isn't racism, it is their inconsistency and hypocrisy.
I have no expectations about your response; frankly, I don't care. The truth needs to be stated regardless of how others "respond." I am "conflating" nothing; in fact, as I pointed out, politicians and the news media are conflating racism with political protest. And I never said that Janean Garofalo was representative; I merely used her as an example from my personal experience, since I remember having a particularly disgusted reaction to what she said. As far as others "besides her," there are plenty, and I could list them into perpetuity, but no matter how many I listed you would always ask "Is that it? Are there any others? They aren't representative," so there's no winning with you on that end. And thank you for agreeing with me that it is an invented story by the media, although it is both on the right and left. Since it is an invented story, as you agree, for the NAACP to state that the Tea Party should denounce racist elements within it then becomes completely ridiculous. Even if there are racist elements in the Tea Party, it's ridiculous to denounce the Tea Party for not denouncing its own racist elements. There are racist elements in EVERY movement, even among those who supported Obama, since a lot of people supported him BECAUSE OF his race, which is equally as racist as opposing him because of his race. If there's one person in the tea party who's racist, does that mean the tea party should halt everything, put discussion of the issues on hold, and then denounce that person? Silliness. And what if that person is racist but nonetheless has legitimate opposition to government policy? While I myself occasionally criticize and am somewhat wary of the movement, especially since it was perverted from a Ron Paul grassroots movement to a mainstream Republican thing, I think that it is just another ploy to avoid the issues to expect denunciation of "racist elements." And even though the NAACP "took pains" not to call the whole movement racist, that doesn't mean that they don't still think that. I don't like Glenn Beck either; I think he's a nut and a hypocrite and a disinfo guy, although to his credit he does have on occasion good, legitimate people with whom I agree, so I consider him at best a necessary evil. And I don't have a martyr complex. I simply have a need to express the hard truth in order to temper your megalomania.
ReplyDeleteInstances of racism?
ReplyDeleteSigns with the n word, which of course do exist. Mark Williams's letter is pretty much there. Attacks on black Congressmen (you may think they're liars but I haven't seen any good reason to believe that was fabricated). I think these claims that Obama is out to get white people perhaps aren't racist, but they combine ignorance, entitlement, and paranoia, which practically speaking is what racism essentially is.
It's all out there. As that NAACP suggests, there are "elements" in the TP movement that broadcast this stuff. That's not to say it is what the Tea Party is.
But I don't think you need to highlight that, which is sort of my point (and I wasn't accusing them of that - Barbarossa brought that issue up) - the socialism and fascism references, and opposition to things like the free exercise of religion are considerably more common than anything that could conceivably be labeled "racist".
If you want me to go on a google search I can't do that now - maybe I'll indulge you tomorrow morning.
"The problem with the TPers isn't racism, it is their inconsistency and hypocrisy."
I don't think its any of those things... I'm not sure what I would call it. Perhaps their "reactionism", their "ignorance", and their "paranoia"? Populism? I can't quite put my finger on what it is exactly.
"I am "conflating" nothing; in fact, as I pointed out, politicians and the news media are conflating racism with political protest."
ReplyDeleteWell see, this is what you're conflating. You take a few instances and you say that "politicians and the news media" are doing it. That's conflation, Barbarossa. If you're going to claim that give me more than Jean Garofalo. I think generally speaking the media has been pretty even keel on this. They report on spats like the NAACP or things like that. But I haven't really seen the media make many of these accusations. Can you name me a single politician that said "The Tea Party is racist"? They might be out there, but I can't think of one off hand.
I wonder if you can.
That's why I say you're conflating a few on the far-left and the echo-chamber that is conservative media with things that the general public actually thinks.
And to the extent that the general public does have reservations about the Tea Party, perhaps the question to ask is "why?".
" Since it is an invented story, as you agree, for the NAACP to state that the Tea Party should denounce racist elements within it then becomes completely ridiculous."
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what your confused about. I agree with the NAACP that the Tea Party should denounce its racist elements. I do not, however, think the Tea Party is a racist movement nor have I ever thought that.
"And I don't have a martyr complex."
You went off on what can only be described as a tangent bemoaning how unfair everyone is to the Tea Party. Give me a different adjective for that.
"I simply have a need to express the hard truth in order to temper your megalomania."
Megalomania?
Elaborate on that, please. I'm getting a little curious now.
"Signs with the n word, which of course do exist."
ReplyDeleteYes, the random, rare sign which states such...
Which reminds me of Conservative efforts to bash anti-war advocates during the Bush years due to the rare sign which said "Free Mumia!"
"Attacks on black Congressmen (you may think they're liars but I haven't seen any good reason to believe that was fabricated)."
Well, since there is no actual evidence to demonstrate the claim one ought to be rather skeptical about it.
"...the socialism and fascism references..."
The fact that their positions on national security and privacy are considered to be part of the reasonable bounds of policy positions would be shocking say in the 1990s. Whether you want to call them "fascist" or not is sort of beside the point. I use the term corporatist when it comes to Obama's domestic policies - the Obama administrations wants to create winners and losers and wants to reward those who are friendly to it - not a new trend, but certainly they've ratcheted the level of corporatism up.
"Which reminds me of Conservative efforts to bash anti-war advocates during the Bush years due to the rare sign which said "Free Mumia!"
ReplyDeleteDid you not read the part where, in responding to Barbossa, I specifically said that these things were not broadly based in the Tea Party and therefore that I was not going to identify these instances with the Tea Party?
Why are you pushing this? My whole point was these things are not characteristic, but that that doesn't mean they don't exist. You seem to want me to say that they are characteristic and common.
"Well, since there is no actual evidence to demonstrate the claim one ought to be rather skeptical about it."
Why? What reason is there to assume they were lying? This seems like the situation where people respond skeptically to a rape victim because there's no proof. Is it possible they're lying? It's possible. But I don't see cause for taking a skeptical approach from the outset.
It is hard to tell what you are saying.
ReplyDeleteIn light of the politically charged atmosphere at the time I do. History is replete with those in power making claims about those they want to tar with various accusations ... though the process need not be willful or even out of conscious malice.