Tag Archive | "Right-Wing Hate"


‘We report, you decide’ — The Obama Haters’ Silent Enablers

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


What is this fury about? In his scant 145 days in office, the new president has not remotely matched the Bush record in deficit creation. Nor has he repealed the right to bear arms or exacerbated the wars he inherited. He has tried more than his predecessor ever did to reach across the aisle. But none of that seems to matter. A minority of Americans, irrationally fearful of the fast-moving generational, cultural and racial turnover Obama embodies — indeed, of the 21st century itself, is now getting angrier in inverse relationship to his popularity with the vast majority of the country. Change can be frightening and traumatic, especially if it’s not change you can believe in. The right-wing rhetoric, with its pseudo-Scriptural call to action, is toxic. It is getting louder each day of the Obama presidency. No one, not even Fox News viewers, can say they weren’t warned.

   By – Frank Rich
Frank RichWHEN a Fox News anchor, reacting to his own network’s surging e-mail traffic, warns urgently on-camera of a rise in hate-filled, “amped up” Americans who are “taking the extra step and getting the gun out,” maybe we should listen. He has better sources in that underground than most.

The anchor was Shepard Smith, speaking after Wednesday’s mayhem at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. Unlike the bloviators at his network and elsewhere on cable, Smith is famous for his highly caffeinated news-reading, not any political agenda. But very occasionally — notably during Hurricane Katrina — he hits the Howard Beale mad-as-hell wall. Joining those at Fox who routinely disregard the network’s “We report, you decide” mantra, he both reported and decided, loudly.

What he reported was this: his e-mail from viewers had “become more and more frightening” in recent months, dating back to the election season. From Wednesday alone, he “could read a hundred” messages spewing “hate that’s not based in fact,” much of it about Barack Obama and some of it sharing the museum gunman’s canard that the president was not a naturally born citizen. These are Americans “out there in a scary place,” Smith said.

Then he brought up another recent gunman: “If you’re one who believes that abortion is murder, at what point do you go out and kill someone who’s performing abortions?” An answer, he said, was provided by Dr. George Tiller’s killer. He went on: “If you are one who believes these sorts of things about the president of the United States …” He left the rest of that chilling sentence unsaid.ox”

These are extraordinary words to hear on Fox. The network’s highest-rated star, Bill O’Reilly, had assailed Tiller, calling him “Tiller the baby killer” and likening him to the Nazis, on 29 of his shows before the doctor was murdered at his church in Kansas. O’Reilly was unrepentant, stating that only “pro-abortion zealots and Fox News haters” would link him to the crime. But now another Fox star, while stopping short of blaming O’Reilly, was breaching his network’s brand of political correctness: he tied the far-right loners who had gotten their guns out in Wichita and Washington to the mounting fury of Obama haters.

O’Reilly responds to “pro-abortion zealots and Fox News haters” who “attempt[ed] to blame us” for Tiller’s murder

What is this fury about? In his scant 145 days in office, the new president has not remotely matched the Bush record in deficit creation. Nor has he repealed the right to bear arms or exacerbated the wars he inherited. He has tried more than his predecessor ever did to reach across the aisle. But none of that seems to matter. A sizable minority of Americans is irrationally fearful of the fast-moving generational, cultural and racial turnover Obama embodies — indeed, of the 21st century itself. That minority is now getting angrier in
inverse relationship to his popularity with the vast majority of the country. Change can be frightening and traumatic, especially if it’s not change you can believe in.

We don’t know whether the tiny subset of domestic terrorists in this crowd is egged on by political or media demagogues — though we do tend to assume that foreign jihadists respond like Pavlov’s dogs to the words of their most fanatical leaders and polemicists. But well before the latest murderers struck — well before another “antigovernment” Obama hater went on a cop-killing rampage in Pittsburgh in April — there have been indications that this rage could spiral out of control.

This was evident during the campaign, when hotheads greeted Obama’s name with “Treason!” and “Terrorist!” at G.O.P. rallies. At first the McCain-Palin campaign fed the anger with accusations that Obama was “palling around with terrorists.” But later John McCain thought better of it and defended his opponent’s honor to a town-hall participant who vented her fears of the Democrats’ “Arab” candidate. Although two neo-Nazi skinheads were arrested in an assassination plot against Obama two weeks before Election Day, the fever broke after McCain exercised leadership.

That honeymoon, if it was one, is over. Conservatives have legitimate ideological beefs with Obama, rightly expressed in sharp language. But the invective in some quarters has unmistakably amped up. The writer Camille Paglia, a political independent and confessed talk-radio fan, detected a shift toward paranoia in the air waves by mid-May. When “the tone darkens toward a rhetoric of purgation and annihilation,” she observed in Salon, “there is reason for alarm.” She cited a “joke” repeated by a Rush Limbaugh fill-in host, a talk-radio jock from Dallas of all places, about how “any U.S. soldier” who found himself with only two bullets in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden would use both shots to assassinate Pelosi and then strangle Reid and bin Laden.

This homicide-saturated vituperation is endemic among mini-Limbaughs. Glenn Beck has dipped into O’Reilly’s Holocaust analogies to liken Obama’s policy on stem-cell research to the eugenics that led to “the final solution” and the quest for “a master race.” After James von Brunn’s rampage at the Holocaust museum, Beck rushed onto Fox News to describe the Obama-hating killer as a “lone gunman nutjob.” Yet in the same show Beck also said von Brunn was a symptom that “the pot in America is boiling,” as if Beck himself were not the boiling pot cheering the kettle on.

But hyperbole from the usual suspects in the entertainment arena of TV and radio is not the whole story. What’s startling is the spillover of this poison into the conservative political establishment. Saul Anuzis, a former Michigan G.O.P. chairman who ran for the party’s national chairmanship this year, seriously suggested in April that Republicans should stop calling Obama a socialist because “it no longer has the negative connotation it had 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago.” Anuzis pushed “fascism” instead, because “everybody still thinks that’s a bad thing.” He didn’t seem to grasp that “fascism” is nonsensical as a description of the Obama administration or that there might be a risk in slurring a president with a word that most find “bad” because it evokes a mass-murderer like Hitler.

The Anuzis “fascism” solution to the Obama problem has caught fire. The president’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court and his speech in Cairo have only exacerbated the ugliness. The venomous personal attacks on Sotomayor have little to do with the 3,000-plus cases she’s adjudicated in nearly 17 years on the bench or her thoughts about the judgment of “a wise Latina woman.” She has been tarred as a member of “the Latino KKK” (by the former Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo), as well as a racist and a David Duke (by Limbaugh), and portrayed, in a bizarre two-for-one ethnic caricature, as a slant-eyed Asian on the cover of National Review. Uniting all these insults is an aggrieved note of white victimization only a shade less explicit than that in von Brunn’s white supremacist screeds.

Obama’s Cairo address, meanwhile, prompted over-the-top accusations reminiscent of those campaign rally cries of “Treason!” It was a prominent former Reagan defense official, Frank Gaffney, not some fringe crackpot, who accused Obama in The Washington Times of engaging “in the most consequential bait-and-switch since Adolf Hitler duped Neville Chamberlain.” He claimed that the president — a lifelong Christian — “may still be” a Muslim and is aligned with “the dangerous global movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood.” Gaffney linked Obama by innuendo with Islamic “charities” that “have been convicted of providing material support for terrorism.”

If this isn’t a handy rationalization for another lone nutjob to take the law into his own hands against a supposed terrorism supporter, what is? Any such nutjob can easily grab a weapon. Gun enthusiasts have been on a shopping spree since the election, with some areas of our country reporting percentage sales increases in the mid-to-high double digits, recession be damned.

The question, Shepard Smith said on Fox last week, is “if there is really a way to put a hold on” those who might run amok. We’re not about to repeal the First or Second Amendments. Hard-core haters resolutely dismiss any “mainstream media” debunking of their conspiracy theories. The only voices that might penetrate their alternative reality — I emphasize might — belong to conservative leaders with the guts and clout to step up as McCain did last fall. Where are they? The genteel public debate in right-leaning intellectual circles about the conservative movement’s future will be buried by history if these insistent alarms are met with silence.

It’s typical of this dereliction of responsibility that when the Department of Homeland Security released a plausible (and, tragically, prescient) report about far-right domestic terrorism two months ago, the conservative response was to trash it as “the height of insult,” in the words of the G.O.P. chairman Michael Steele. But as Smith also said last week, Homeland Security was “warning us for a reason.”

No matter. Last week it was business as usual, as Republican leaders nattered ad infinitum over the juvenile rivalry of Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich at the party’s big Washington fund-raiser. Few if any mentioned, let alone questioned, the ominous script delivered by the actor Jon Voight with the G.O.P. imprimatur at that same event. Voight’s devout wish was to “bring an end to this false prophet Obama.”

This kind of rhetoric, with its pseudo-Scriptural call to action, is toxic. It is getting louder each day of the Obama presidency. No one, not even Fox News viewers, can say they weren’t warned.

About The Author: Frank Rich is an Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times. His weekly 1,500-word essay helped inaugurate the expanded opinion pages that the paper introduced in the Sunday Week in Review section in April 2005.

Mr. Rich started as a columnist on the Op-Ed Page in January 1994. He first began writing his longer-form essays for the Op-Ed page in 1999, and from 1999 to 2003 was also a senior writer for The New York Times Magazine, a dual title that was a first for The Times. Before writing his column, Mr. Rich served as The Times’s chief drama critic beginning in 1980, the year he joined The Times.

From 2003 to 2005, Mr. Rich was the front-page columnist for the Sunday Arts & Leisure section as part of that section’s redesign and expansion. He also served in an advisory role in the revamping of The Times’s daily and Sunday cultural report during that time.

Among other honors, Mr. Rich received the George Polk Award for commentary in 2005. In addition to his work at The Times, he has written about politics and culture for many other publications. His latest book, “The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth From 9/11 to Katrina,” was published by Penguin Press in 2006 and as a Penguin paperback in 2007. His childhood memoir, “Ghost Light,” was published in 2000 by Random House and as a Random House Trade Paperback in 2001. The film rights to “Ghost Light” have been acquired by Storyline Entertainment. A collection of Mr. Rich’s drama reviews, “Hot Seat: Theater Criticism for The New York Times, 1980-1993,” was published by Random House in October 1998. His book “The Theatre Art of Boris Aronson,” co-authored with Lisa Aronson, was published by Knopf in 1987.

In May 2008, Mr. Rich signed on as a creative consultant to help initiate and develop new programming at the pay-TV network HBO. He recused himself from writing about either HBO or its parent company, Time Warner, in his weekly Times column.

Before joining The Times, Mr. Rich was a film and television critic at Time magazine. Earlier, he had been film critic for The New York Post and film critic and senior editor of New Times Magazine. He was a founding editor of The Richmond (Va.) Mercury, a weekly newspaper, in the early 1970s.

Mr. Rich earned a B.A. degree in American History and Literature, graduating magna cum laude from Harvard College in 1971 and serving as Editorial Chairman of The Harvard Crimson.

Mr. Rich has two sons. He lives in Manhattan with his wife, the author and novelist Alex Witchel, who is a staff writer for The New York Times Magazine.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Sphere: Related Content

The TeaBag ‘Terrorist’ Suckers Are The New ‘White Power Movement’

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


This was NOT a grassroots movement as Fox and right-Wing news outlets might want you to think. It was the re-emergence of the WHITE POWER MOVEMENT incorporated into the Republican Party — targeting the president of the United States Barack Obama, a black man.

Unfortunately, there are still millions of white supremacists out there — rednecks doing the bidding of rich bigots in suits, both who believe that white people are superior to people of other racial backgrounds.

This is not a political ideology — it is PURE HATE.

Let no one convince you that this was an economic protest — three quarters of those protesting know nothing about the economic history of this country, other than what they are spoon fed by the Republican Party.

They are being used as usual by the fat cats of the GOP — who have used race to scare up votes since the civil rights era began.

From the end of Reconstruction until the beginning of the civil rights era, the national Democratic Party made room for segregationist members — and as a result dominated the South. But in the 50s and 60s, Democrats embraced the civil rights movement, costing them the white Southern vote.

Meanwhile, the Republican Party successfully wooed disaffected white racists with a “southern strategy” that championed “states” rights. This strategy failed, finally, during McCain’s run for the White House, but it seems the G.O.P instead of re-tooling, have decided to entrench deep into Bigot America.

White Republicans on average are less educated that their liberal counterparts, and therefore are more likely to be led to the slaughterhouse like brainless sheep. Conversely, a Pew research last October found out that Republicans are generally happier than Democrats.

Why not? The majority of Republicans live in the “bush” anyway, away from the hustle and bustle of large cities. They live in small towns ruled by sheriffs and a handful of town committee members. I know because I grew up in the countryside too — There is not much to worry about, except how spooky Jesus will treat you next Sunday.

I have engaged some in political conversations before, and it doesn’t take too long to discover how inadequate and warped their reasoning is. Add their racist feelings to the mix, and there you have suckers — ready to be played by rich Republican Fat Cats — like a Yo-Yo.

What you saw on tax day is far from being called a grass-roots campaign, rather, it was a congregation of whites steaming with racism, bigotry and extreme ignorance, directed at the first black president of the United States — Barack Hussein Obama, ….and the other colored people — Hispanic Immigrants.

The tea-parties were an act of domestic terrorism, as far as I am concerned. A “Talibanist” act. An attempt to eject President Obama from the White House by hook or crook!

From PublicEye.ORG – The White Power Movement:

White power activists are drawn from a network of overlapping groups, most notably the Ku Klux Klan, Christian Identity groups, neo-Nazis, and Aryan skinheads.

While there are differences among them, they all agree on fundamental doctrines. Foremost is a commitment to white power and defending the “white race” from “genocide.” They envision a racially exclusive world where “non-whites” are vanquished, segregated, or at least subordinated to Aryan authority. Adherents are also strongly anti-Semitic; support Aryan militarist nationalism; oppose homosexuality; and denounce inter-racial sex, marriage, and procreation.

The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that more than 750 white power organizations are active in the United States, the most notorious being the Klan, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, Hammerskins, and White Aryan Resistance. But the number of groups is not a wholly reliable measure of white power activity and no one knows just how many actual members there are. [ READ MORE ]

Ref: [ Images of Right-Wing Terrorism In America ]

The Sad Reality of The Tea-Parties and Janeane Garofalo

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Fox News continues with DHS (Department of Homeland Security) freak-out even after Smith and Herridge’s debunking:

On the April 15 edition of Fox News’ Studio B, host Shepard Smith reported that a recent Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report — which concluded that “rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues” — “isn’t about tea party folks” and that “it sounds like just regular old, everyday people who are conservative just got, you know, got their dander up over something that is not applied to that.”

During the same segment, national correspondent Catherine Herridge noted that DHS recently issued “a bulletin that looks at the left-wing groups as well.” Nonetheless, Fox News hosts and contributors have continued to advance the claim that the Obama administration is targeting tea party attendees, as well as conservatives and others, simply because they disagree with administration policies and proposals. [ READ MORE ]

Tea-Parties — Powered By “un-Fair and Totally un-Balanced” Fox News:

From April 6 to April 15, Fox News aired at least 107 commercial promotions for their coverage of the April 15 tea parties. The majority of all the ads — 58 — ran on April 14 and 15.

Page and Robinson Review The Effect of Tea-Parties

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

———————————————————————————————————————————————-



———————————————————————————————————————————————-

Popularity: 9% [?]

Sphere: Related Content

Book Review — The age of ‘American Unreason’

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly: Inspired by Richard Hofstadter’s trenchant 1963 cultural analysis Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, Jacoby (Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism) has produced an engaging, updated and meticulously thought-out continuation of her academic idol’s research.

The Age of American UnreasonDismayed by the average U.S. citizen’s political and social apathy and the overall crisis of memory and knowledge involving everything about the way we learn and think, Jacoby passionately argues that the nation’s current cult of unreason has deadly and destructive consequences (the war in Iraq, for one) and traces the seeds of current anti-intellectualism (and its partner in crime, antirationalism) back to post-WWII society.

Unafraid of pointing fingers, she singles out mass media and the resurgence of fundamentalist religion as the primary vectors of anti-intellectualism, while also having harsh words for pseudoscientists.

Through historical research, Jacoby breaks down popular beliefs that the 1950s were a cultural wasteland and the 1960s were solely a breeding ground for liberals.

Though sometimes partial to inflated prose (America’s endemic anti-intellectual tendencies have been grievously exacerbated by a new species of semiconscious anti-rationalism), Jacoby has assembled an erudite mix of personal anecdotes, cultural history and social commentary to decry America’s retreat into junk thought. (Feb. 12)

————————–

From The New Yorker: Identifying herself as a “cultural conservationist” (but by no means a cultural conservative), Jacoby laments the decline of middlebrow American culture and presents a cogent defense of intellectualism.

America, she believes, faces a “crisis of memory and knowledge,” in which anti-intellectualism is not only tolerated but celebrated by those in politics and the media to whom we are all “just folks.

The Internet, for all its promise, is too often “a highway to the far-flung regions of junk thought.” Meanwhile, twenty-five per cent of high-school biology teachers believe that human beings and dinosaurs shared the earth, and more than a third of Americans can?t name a single First Amendment right.

In such an environment, Jacoby argues, the secular left and the religious right can have no fruitful dialogue on issues like the separation of church and state.

She offers little hope that the situation will improve, opining that, despite increasing levels of education, “Americans seem to know less and less.” — Click here to subscribe to The New Yorker

See all Editorial Reviews

————————————————————————

————————————————————————-

Rush Limbaugh Is An Asshole
   [ Pic: Rush Limbaugh ]

Who is Rush Limbaugh?

He is America’s most notorious political shock jock. An ass-hole of humongous magnitude.

A Big Fat Idiot to be precise. A racist, drug-addicted, lying, hypocritical THUG.

Rush has a dedicated congregation of millions of right-wing Americans listening to his bull-shit on radio every week.

Mr. Limbaugh is a huge tank — full of mis-information excrement — a delicacy in right-wing circles.

Listen to this goon — equate Barack Obama with Osama Bin Laden.

———————————————————

Popularity: 8% [?]

Sphere: Related Content

Froth & Scum — Republican Hate Radio

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Part 1

Part 2

—————————————————–

I am a Republican and ashamed of this GOP!

Froth and Scum: Truth, Beauty, Goodness, and the Ax Murder in America’s First Mass Medium

Froth and Scum: Truth, Beauty, Goodness, and the Ax Murder in America's First Mass MediumEditorial Reviews

From the yellowed columns of newsprint, Ms. Tucher . . . skillfully draws a contemporary moral. — New York Times Book Review

[Tucher] presents the colorful story of the early penny press with all the verve, intelligence, and humor it merits. — American Heritage

A deceptively complex book. . . . A readable, racy, and often funny study of an important aspect of antebellum social history. — American Historical Review

This well-written book is a valuable contribution to the literature on journalism in the nineteenth century. — Journal of the Early Republic

This is scholarship as solid as oak and history as timely as today’s tabloid titillation. — Bill Moyers

Product Description

Two notorious antebellum New York murder cases–a prostitute slashed in an elegant brothel and a tradesman bludgeoned by the brother of inventor Samuel Colt–set off journalistic scrambles over the meanings of truth, objectivity, and the duty of the press that reverberate to this day.

In 1833 an entirely new kind of newspaper–cheap, feisty, and politically independent–introduced American readers to the novel concept of what has come to be called objectivity in news coverage. The penny press was the first medium that claimed to present the true, unbiased facts to a democratic audience. But in Froth and Scum, Andie Tucher explores–and explodes–the notion that ‘objective’ reporting will discover a single, definitive truth.

As they do now, news stories of the time aroused strong feelings about the possibility of justice, the privileges of power, and the nature of evil. The prostitute’s murder in 1836 sparked an impassioned public debate, but one newspaper’s ‘impartial investigation’ pleased the powerful by helping the killer go free. Colt’s 1841 murder of the tradesman inspired universal condemnation, but the newspapers’ singleminded focus on his conviction allowed another secret criminal to escape. By examining media coverage of these two sensational murders, Tucher reveals how a community’s needs and anxieties can shape its public truths. The manuscript of this book won the 1991 Allan Nevins Prize of the Society of American Historians for the best-written dissertation in American history.

See all reviews

Popularity: 7% [?]

Sphere: Related Content

English flagItalian flagKorean flagChinese (Simplified) flagChinese (Traditional) flagPortuguese flagGerman flagFrench flagSpanish flagJapanese flagArabic flagRussian flagGreek flagDutch flagBulgarian flagCzech flagCroatian flag
Danish flagFinnish flagHindi flagPolish flagRomanian flagSwedish flagNorwegian flagCatalan flagFilipino flagHebrew flagIndonesian flagLatvian flagLithuanian flagSerbian flagSlovak flagSlovenian flagUkrainian flag
Vietnamese flagAlbanian flagEstonian flagGalician flagMaltese flagThai flagTurkish flagHungarian flagBelarus flagIrish flagIcelandic flagMacedonian flagMalay flagPersian flag   


Go To Our YouTube Channel Subscribe To Our Newsletter Install our Widget-Box on Your Site! Blog SiteMap Subscribe via Google Mobile-Reader
Haiti Earthquake Disaster -- Click here To Help
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

RealClearPolitics - Daily Poll Averages

Popular Tags

Recent Page Hits




MyBlogLog Community




Join My community

Truth-O-Meter

The Obama Plan - Weekly

|  Go Big  |  Dr. Sakis!  |

Site Sponsors

Information

Advertisement



Partners



Top 100 - Marketing
http://www.wikio.com
Afrigator





Follow Me on Twitter