![[freedomtowernight_edited.jpg]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_i7tmcOiJ4hc/RoJ3zn0O-9I/AAAAAAAAAFw/5Y4WaIwDd6k/s1600/freedomtowernight_edited.jpg)
Lefties Lecture on Race
Next time someone insinuates that you're a racist, or straight out calls you a racist for disagreeing, even vehemently or perhaps rudely, with President Obama, remember the words of these mental midgets who...as hard-core leftists...should be the last people on Earth to lecture ANYONE about race and racism:
- Maureen Dowd. Silly girl.
- Eugene Robinson (You have to wait until the second half of the column, but it's worth the wait).
- The One and Only Bill Maher (courtesy of Drudge). When leftists use sarcasm and "wit" as an excuse for making racial remarks, even they must realize how incredibly stupid and disingenuous it sounds.
Actually, we should be really be listening to people like Bob Parks. But that's just me talking.
- Maureen Dowd. Silly girl.
- Eugene Robinson (You have to wait until the second half of the column, but it's worth the wait).
- The One and Only Bill Maher (courtesy of Drudge). When leftists use sarcasm and "wit" as an excuse for making racial remarks, even they must realize how incredibly stupid and disingenuous it sounds.
Actually, we should be really be listening to people like Bob Parks. But that's just me talking.
posted by Robert at 7:25 PM
16 Comments:
Robert: you stopped comments on that other post? Really?
I was addressing Jonathan's response and was getting to your question, which I think is legit.
You're actually closing down comments on a thread? Why???
.
You continue to avoid addressing the issues, Rick. After 18 comments, if we haven't gotten to the core of the issues, it's not going to happen at all. I'm a patient person, but my patience has limits.
If you would like to talk about the issues without resorting to ad hominem attacks, consider this your opportunity to do so.
For those having hissy fits over the whole Obama/Hitler concept, a crash course on at the very least the last 4 years.
Oh and the race issue is also covered here along with fascism, and other really wonderful adjectives that the left all of a sudden is so quick to denounce.
Note: I hated it when the left did it and I hate that the right is doing it now. HOWEVER, for the left to denounce it now as racist or imbecile attacks when they did the SAME EXACT THING is really hypocritical and a HUGE double standard.
At least have the balls to say "yeah we did it too, we just don' like it when the shoe is in the other foot".
Same thing that when Bush was in the WH dissent was patriotic. Now dissent is racist and will bring about white hooded people in horses in the middle of the night. Give me a fucking break.
Discuss the issues but don't discredit genuine opposition through childish name calling and personal insults.
This country is overwhelmingly centrist. Protestants vote based on values; Catholics vote based on fiscal conservatism. Last time I checked those two religions cover the majority of the US.
This is about policy and not about race.
Are there crazy people out there? yes, much like in the left there are crazy people too.
Thank you, LV. Interesting how memories can be conveniently short when they have to be.
Robert, thanks for the opportunity. It's not like you to close down comments because they were not proceeding as you liked so I was wondering.
However, I think my comments which were based on your post and Jonathan's follow up were totally on point. I think discussing the behavior of the Right during the last presidency is extremely relevant to the present because it is so much in conflict with their behavior just a few short years later. Dissent was bad back then, now it is good. Calling the President a Nazi was bad back then, now it is okay. Supporting the President during war and a national crisis was necessary back then, now, not so much. Now I suppose you could reverse the tables and say the same for the Left [that dissent was okay back then, but it isn't now and calling the President a Nazi back then was okay, but it isn't now] but I think there is one big difference.
With the exception of extremists, Bush was never actually considered to be a Nazi or a murderer. Yes, many considered him to be a liar and a "frat boy" [*raises hand*] and any other number of other things, but there were relatively few that actually believed that the U.S. was turning into the Third Reich. But today there are many on the Right who are adamant in their belief that the President of the United States is a fascist, Marxist, or, in a local vein, following the path of Fidel Castro. They actually believe it and they have no problem stating so on mainstream conservative websites. They tune in to Beck, Limbaugh and Michael Savage and approve of what they hear. These people are not some backroom extremists on obscure forums. They are yours and my neighbors. And some of these same people, some of whom frequent babalu, have openly discussed the possibility of overthrowing the U.S. Government or "stopping" the President," whatever that means. This is a new level of opposition. One that shows up at Obama speeches with assault rifles slung over their shoulders. One that has no problem carrying signs at the 9-12 rally that say "We Came Unarmed [This Time]."
Now, I don't know what you believe, Robert. Perhaps you agree with them and perhaps you think that a left wing radical who is following in the footsteps of Karl Marx or Mussolini is in the White House and in charge of millions of federal workers and servicemen around the world. You would have lots of support in that belief, especially from your co-writer. But if you don't, it's important for you and other conservatives like you to distance yourself from this talk because right now, they are getting all the air time and are attracting more and more followers all the time, re: Glenn Beck ratings. Whether you like it or not, or whether you accept it or not, the reality is that this kind of stuff now personifies the Republican Party. This is the "new direction" that you reference in that post.
And so, getting to your question, "[W]here were you when the countless Bush/Hitler comparisons and comments were being fired off by many on the "center-left" during much of the previous 8 years? Did you denounce them as stridently as you would like the kooky right to? Please explain."
Where was I? I was right here not participating in those characterizations and not linking to or writing with people who did. You didn't see any photoshops of Bush on my blog and I never had nor would I have allowed comments like that go unaddressed. And before you say "gotcha," I do admit to and still believe that Bush was a disingenuous POS. In fact, that opinion continues to be verified as more and more people in the Administration sign book deals. That's a whole lot different than viewing the President as a Marxist or fascist intent on destroying the country and becoming the next Fidel Castro....and being totally sincere about it.
-cont. below-
.
-cont.-
LV, I'd love to see any type of news report showing a liberal walking outside a Bush rally with assault rifles strapped over their shoulders. I would love to see links to discussion where progressives had online discussions about overthrowing the Bush Administration and how they would be probably outgunned by the U.S. military. And I would love to see where liberal protesters marched on the Mall in front of the White House with signs that said that this time they came unarmed. A rally, by the way, that would have been supported by nationally syndicated radio hosts.
It's different, much different. And I think you know it.
.
I think discussing the behavior of the Right during the last presidency is extremely relevant to the present because it is so much in conflict with their behavior just a few short years later. Dissent was bad back then, now it is good. Calling the President a Nazi was bad back then, now it is okay. Supporting the President during war and a national crisis was necessary back then, now, not so much. Now I suppose you could reverse the tables and say the same for the Left [that dissent was okay back then, but it isn't now and calling the President a Nazi back then was okay, but it isn't now] but I think there is one big difference.
I don't know exactly who was trying to shut down dissent pre-Obama, other than the usual back and forth arguing by pundits. And aside from the few extremists out there, who really thinks it's right and even accurate to call Obama a Nazi? Again, we're falling down the trap of overgeneralizing. I wouldn't be wasting my time here if I knew for a fact that most average people on the right won't fall for that crap.
With the exception of extremists, Bush was never actually considered to be a Nazi or a murderer.
You can say the exact same thing now but replace Bush with Obama. Only difference is that those that called Bush a Nazi and a murderer weren't singled out by the media the way it's happening today with the anti-Obama folks. IMO, the media tacitly approved of the Bush-bashing.
But today there are many on the Right who are adamant in their belief that the President of the United States is a fascist, Marxist, or, in a local vein, following the path of Fidel Castro. They actually believe it and they have no problem stating so on mainstream conservative websites.
As Jonathan implied in the other thread, calling someone a fascist, or a Marxist isn't the same as calling someone a murderer or even a Nazi, and there's evidence to support some of this belief. If that's the core of your complaint, then I'm afraid you're going to continue hearing it until Obama stops siding with the likes of Chavez and stops attempting to push socialized medicine.
The problem, Rick, is that you're trying too hard to find someone that makes a distasteful comment about the president in order to run with it. It's natural in an open forum that you're going to have those who are going to say totally off the wall things. Why should anyone think that it's representative of most people? I never had a problem with people disagreeing with Bush, just with the nasty tone and rhetoric employed by some. Unfortunately, too many folks sort of tacitly approved by not clearly denouncing those type of remarks. I distance myself from those people by trying to stick with facts, mentioning in the closed comment thread about the counter-productiveness of such methods and simply not encouraging those type of remarks.
I don't expect you to agree, and that's fine. At least you ought to understand where I'm coming and why.
And aside from the few extremists out there, who really thinks it's right and even accurate to call Obama a Nazi?
Robert. Seriously. Read babalu more often. Read what Moneo has been posting. I'm not making this stuff up. Honestly.
And watch this You Tube video of an interview with Mark Williams, organizer of the Tea Party Express. Keep in mind that this is the guy organizing the events.
My point, not my complaint, is that these characterizations of the President are genuinely believed by those making them whereas the ones that were made by liberals in the Bush era were made out of nastiness or anger. The danger with the current trend is that vulnerable Americans, sick and tired of bad economic times, are believing Beck and Limbaugh, who have an audience of millions, and Mark Williams, who is organizing these events.
The fanaticism and extremism has become the mainstream of conservatives out there.
I have a bad memory, but I don't remember Liberals carrying assault rifles outside of Bush events or holding signs outside the White House that implying that next time they're coming back armed.
I appreciate you opening up this thread for discussion and giving me an opportunity to explain myself. I also don't expect to change your mind or even consider what I have to say as carrying any weight, but at least you know, somewhat, how I'm coming to my opinions.
.
I don't agree with Williams' "racist in chief" remark. At best it was a silly and immature comment. As far as it influencing or representing the majority of the tea party protesters, I can only speak for what I know, feel and hear from people like me who've either participated or sympathize with the protests. Like I've said (and what Williams pointed out before he said his dubious remark), these are mainly average people out there who are genuinely concerned and even angry at many of Obama's actions and policies to date. You say liberals were angry at Bush, and I understand that. But many conservatives and independents are similarly angry at Obama. This whole discussion revolves around your desire to hoist the fringe minority as the example for a movement, when my experiences and beliefs tell me that's just not so. The mere act of opposing the president is not extremism, especially when the beliefs of the dissenters are in line with those of our founders.
I want to go back to the subject of the original post because it ties in with this discussion. We're hearing more and more of these MSM liberals categorizing those who disagree with Obama as racist. Now we have Jimmy Carter coming out and basically saying the same thing. Exactly how are we supposed to have a discussion as a nation when former presidents say that opposition to Obama is based on racism? As Laura Ingraham stated on the O'Reilly Factor earlier tonight, Carter's words were toxic. Are we to believe that a significant chunk of this country all of a sudden opposes Obama because they're racist? Just a few months ago, Obama had a 70% approval rating. 70%! Where were the racists hiding then?
No self-respecting, decent person wants to be called a racist. Obama needs to come out and dismiss and denounce these clowns, quickly. If not, his numbers will continue to drop and the toxic environment we're currently in will only get worse. And it will all be Obama's own doing.
I'm not sure that I agree that all of these attacks on President Obama are racially motivated. I will say that you would be foolish to forget all the racial characterizations that members of the GOP were involved in during the Presidential campaign such as the buttons that were being sold at a Texas GOP convention and the poster of Obama as a witch doctor that received wide circulation on conservative blogs. And then there was the more recent poster of the President in white face as The Joker.
Racism has not disappeared from the U.S. as the recent beating of a black woman in Morrow, Georgia, illustrates and I am sure there are plenty of people out there who are very uncomfortable with having a black man as President.
.
Yeah, this never happened. Nor this. I'm sure this was an isolated leftie at a protest. And also, I must've dreamt up Olberman, and some threads at DU too.
Rick we can play this game of tit-tat all day. It doesn't solve anything. The extreme right hates Obama as much as the left hated Bush. SAME DEAL.
Like I said before: I don't agree with this type of behavior from either side, but don't come now and denounce something that your side did for at least the past 4 years. What's that? You didn't do it? Doesn't matter, according to your argument, since you sweep alll righties together in one nice little bundle.
And I'm with Robert, dude stop using Babalu on this blog. This is Robert's place, and much like everyone else, we all have different opinions. You got a beef with George? Take it up with him.
Listen, LV, I'm really trying hard to keep it civil, okay? You and your f-bombs and telling me where to take my comments is making it real hard. I give back what I get and I'm real effin' close to telling you where to stick it.
We disagree. Alright? Won't be the first time. Won't be the last. But just stop with the 'tude and getting up in my face, okay?
And FYI, I'm banned from babalu. I would loooovvvvve to take it up with every single one of those scholars. But they can't handle it. So I do what I do. Regardless, if it's germane to the discussion it should be brought up no matter where the discussion is being held.
.
f-bombs? Give me a break Rick. Once, okay, I used the f-word once!
'tude? Sorry, Rick, you are reading it, I'm not giving it. Okay, maybe in this email I am because I find it hilarious that you are calling me uncivil and using f-bombs, when I used the f-word ONCE and not even directed to you, but to the topic of the post itself.
Telling you where to take your comments? Tsk, tsk again Rick. Telling you simply to at least try to comply with what Robert said, and keep your beef with Babalu out of here.
So please, don't go calling me uncivil, and threatening to tell me where to stick it. I haven't been disrespectful to you at any moment, so I'd really appreciate it you'd return the courtesy.
And yes we disagree but with one difference. I am able to recognize that what the right is doing to Obama in emulating what the left did to Bush - the insults, the ridicule, the Nazi comparisons, the racist insult, etc. is wrong. It was wrong then, it is wrong now.
Yet all I keep hearing from the left are gasps and mouths dropping open at the mere shock of someone insulting, ridiculing or criticizing Obama. And that is hypocrisy at worst and a double standard at best.
The supposed parallel between leftist abuse of Bush and rightist abuse of Obama fails on examination. Bush ran as a moderate and that's pretty much how he governed. He was a big spender and a social conservative. There were no surprises except for the war. He was honest as politicians go. He wasn't corrupt (the oil theories don't make sense) and didn't abuse power. He operated in good faith and attempted to appeal to his political and ideological opponents. The left hated him because he fought back hard after 9/11 and wouldn't apologize for it, because they opposed the small-government parts of his agenda (SS reform, for example) and to some extent because a lot of leftists are bigoted against people they perceive as Christian/social conservatives.
Obama is a different story. He ran a deceitful campaign as a left-wing moderate. Once inaugurated he immediately began governing as a hard leftist, trying to transform this country into something that most Americans don't want, and trying to do it so rapidly that political opponents wouldn't have a chance to organize. He lies constantly. He won't debate honestly, preferring straw-man arguments and personal attacks on political opponents ("racists"). He is either personally corrupt or tolerates corruption (Chicago). He supports Hugo Chavez (not that he will admit it, but how else do you interpret his shit-eating grin when meeting Chavez or his vendetta against democratic Honduras?). He is OK with abuses of power in service to the cause (SEIU goons, "fishy" email report-your-neighbors scheme). It's reasonable to ask if he's a communist or fascist since he sometimes acts like one. You may like or dislike Bush but he was firmly within the American political mainstream. Obama is not, we have never had a hard leftist as President, and there is nothing extreme about pointing this out.
LV...right, you didn't use f-bombs, you used an f-bomb. Sorry for the "s." And you weren't uncivil. NOT AT ALL, girl. See how that goes, LV. It's all how you f*cking read it.
Here's your straw man, Jonathan.
And, oh, hey....did you hear that Rush wants segregated buses?
Yeah, things are just like they were when W was around. Uh-huh.
.
And, oh, hey....did you hear that Rush wants segregated buses?
And this is relevant to calling opposition to Obama's policies racist how exactly?
Are there racist people in the right, Yes. Are there racist people in the left, yes too .... or have we forgotten the history of the Democratic Party in the KKK?
Racists are everywhere. People will make signs, some of them with racist intent, some of them without.
Bush was many times depicted as a monkey. What it wasn't racist because he was white? It wasn't just as insulting?
This is the problem Rick, that you fail to see or simply don't want to address it because you know its happening and you don't mind it.
Calling the opposition racist as a whole is not only using a VERY wide brush but it is completely ignorant and entirely against any intention of generating discourse.
If the Democrats really thought their plan was swell, they'd pass it on their own much like they did with the Stimulus.
we have never had a hard leftist as President, and there is nothing extreme about pointing this out.
I have to give this one to Jonathan. My democrat friends who are centrists, are literally scared of the guy and of the direction the country is taking. Again, much like lefties were with Bush.
There is real opposition to health care reform NOW, as in the moment we are in, as in the speed they want to forge this with. There is real and honest opposition to keep going on a spending spree similar to Bush's when Obama was elected because he promised to CHANGE that, CHANGE the direction the country was going in and CURB spending in Washington. I know many with voter's remorse. He was elected thanks to Blacks and independents. He cannot afford to lose the support of the latter.
That's not racist.
As far as your wonderful condescending and disrespectful attitude, I explained myself once, I won't do it twice. Read and see what you want. You always do.
Post a Comment
<< Home