And it isn't just the anger over his re-election that is so notable but the way in which that anger is being expressed. Many pro-Bush bloggers who expressed anger about Nagin's re-election did so in overtly racial terms.
The most-cited post on this topic was this one by Paul "Deacon" Mirgenoff of Powerline, who, for some indiscernible reason, analogized Nagin to the multiple felon and crack addict Marion Barry, ex-Mayor of Washington, DC:
Having witnessed Marion Barry repeatedly elected mayor of Washington, D.C., I can't say I'm surprised at Nagin's success. Re-electing an unsuccessful or disgraced mayor apparently can become a source of civic pride, particularly when the racial politics are right.
Gateway Pundit has a post with the hilarious title "Chocolate City Keeps its Flavor," the very first line of which repeats the hilarity: "Ray Nagin was re-elected Mayor of Chocolate City yesterday." After assembling the list of Nagin's alleged acts of incompetence, GP finally comes out with it: "Or, maybe, it was really a simple black and white thing." He then cites to Deacon's Marion Barry analogy. Independent Conservative announces in the title of his post: "Now the Poverty Pimps Will Stop Crying About the New Orleans Election." The consensus is that the people of New Orleans are clearly just "stupid."
It is certainly true that Nagin made some race-based appeals as part of his re-election campaign, including comments like this:
"This city will be a majority African-American city. It's the way God wants it to be," Nagin said. "You can't have it no other way. It wouldn't be New Orleans."
He also called New Orleans a "chocolate city" and pledged that it "will be chocolate at the end of the day." There are certainly legitimate grounds for criticizing comments like that, and many of his allies in New Orleans, including many who are black, did exactly that. That's all fair enough.
But this spewing of racially-tinged anger over Nagin's re-election is both childish and ugly. These bloggers having their fun with "chocolate" and "flavor" jokes think they have a built-in defense for speaking that way (namely, Nagin's use of those terms), and so, like an 8-year-old who discovers some excuse for using a bad word, they just revel in it over and over. The second they think there is an opportunity to spew all sorts of racially-tinged bile, they take it. And thus, a mayoral election is spoken of in terms of "poverty pimps" and "chocolate cities" and overt claims that he was only elected because he's black.
Beyond that, the comparisons to Marion Barry are as baseless as they are telling. Barry is known for all sorts of behaviors that have long been at the crux of ugly racist stereotypes -- he's a drug addict who has been caught on camera using crack with hookers in a downtown hotel, and he then encountered all sorts of allegations of financial impropriety in connection with his political office.
None of that is true for Nagin. Nagin and Barry have nothing in common other than that they are black Mayors. It would be like comparing every white Southern Governor to Lester Maddux, or every white evangelical Christian male to Jim Bakker or every white Southern male to David Duke. It's deliberately inflammatory, and it purposely seizes what they perceive is an opportunity to traffic in racial stereotypes which they normally are too afraid to voice.
The people commenting on this municipal election have no idea why Nagin was re-elected. There are all sorts of reasons why that might have happened. Perhaps the voters thought he was not to blame for what happened with Katrina. Perhaps they thought he was heroic in how he stood up to the Federal Government and pinned the blame where it belonged. Perhaps they thought he did the best he could and was satisfied with his governance in other areas. Perhaps they had no faith in his opponent that he could do better. Those who are claiming that he was re-elected by a bunch of stupid black voters strictly on racial grounds have no idea whether that's true and they don't care either.
All they know is that they excitedly see an opportunity where they think this sort of spiteful racial commentary -- which is normally beyond the bounds of what is acceptable -- is permissible here, and they can't pass up the chance to spew playground epithets about Ray Nagin's race and about the intellectual level of the voters who re-elected him. These ugly sentiments are never far from the surface in many people and it doesn't take much for it to come spewing forth.
I've got one of my own...McCain the war hero...
ReplyDeleteLater in life, McCain would quip, "Do not call me a 'war hero'...I am anything but! The fact that I was incompetent enough to get shot down twice in war should dissuade you from that fact."
After graduating from the US Naval Academy, McCain reported to Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida to begin training as a Naval Aviator. While in training, McCain suffered a mishap during which his aircraft crashed into Corpus Christi Bay, though he escaped. McCain graduated successfully and entered the US Navy's Light Attack Community as a Naval Aviator.
Prior to becoming a Naval Aviator, McCain flew the propellor-driven A-1 Skyraider on Navy cruises to Europe. During a trip to attend the Army-Navy game, McCain suffered an engine failure and was forced to eject from his crippled aircraft. This rash of accidents was not uncommon during the era of Navy flying McCain was in. Tom Wolfe's The Right Stuff explains that a career naval aviator (20 year pilot) was statistically expected to have to eject from his aircraft at least twice in the span of a career.
McCain escaped death once again in 1967. While the USS Forrestal sat off the coast of Vietnam preparing for attacks, a Zuni rocket from an F-4 Phantom was accidentally launched across the carrier's deck. The rocket struck McCain's A-4E Skyhawk as it was preparing for launch. The impact ruptured the aircraft's fuel tank. Leaking fuel ignited, knocking two bombs loose. McCain escaped from his jet by climbing out of the cockpit, walking down to the nose of the plane, and jumping off the nose boom onto the burning deck. Ninety seconds after the impact, the bomb exploded underneath the airplane. McCain was struck in the legs and chest by shrapnel. The ensuing fire killed 134 sailors, destroyed 20 aircraft and threatened to sink the ship.[1] Film shot aboard the Forrestal shows McCain narrowly escaping the explosion.
After the Forrestal incident, McCain volunteered to join the VA-163 Saints on board the Oriskany, which was short-handed after a separate deck incident on that ship. The Saints squadron and its parent Air Wing 16 suffered the highest loss rate of any Navy Flying unit during the entire Vietnam War. This was due to the perilous missions assigned to it and to the aggressive demeanor of its aviators. On October 26, 1966, prior to McCain's transfer to that carrier, the mis-handling of a flare had resulted in a deck fire (44 men lost their lives, including 24 pilots).
Shortly thereafter he was shot down over Vietnam. I'm almost certain more coalition troops died in friendly fire incidents in GWI than by enemy fire. I don't want another incompetent, or even just someone with really bad luck, as CINC. Not after the Bush- Cheney clusterfuck.
Amen Glenn. Thank you for posting this. I am glad to see people standing up to Powerline et al for their posts. You hit the nail right on the head - childish indeed. It really does go to show how much this stuff does simmer right below the surface for a lot of rightwingers.
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere that "all Republicans [Conservatives? Right-Wingers?] are not bigots, but the converse is almost certainly true - all bigots are Republicans..."
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere that "all Republicans [Conservatives? Right-Wingers?] are not bigots, but the converse is almost certainly true - all bigots are Republicans..."
ReplyDeleteThat very much fluctuates.
When Bigots Become Reformers:
The Progressive Era’s shameful record on race.
Bush actually does like and embrace Hispanics, but a large sector of his base is virulently anti-Hispanic. Hence his huge problem with that base becoming enraged over immigration. Anyone who doesn't realize the huge component of racism involved in the sudden jihad against illegal immigrants-- or who thinks that the concern for many is primarily about upholding the law -- is blind. The Nagin re-election gave them an excuse to spew racist sentiments they normally have the sense to refrain from, since, as Glenn describes, they can invoke the cover of Nagin's own ill-advised commentary. The angst over "illegals" does the same for many.
(And yes, I ardently do accept that there are plenty of non-racists who take principled, tho I believe erroneous, stands against allowing generous immigration.)
'Hypatia" said...
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere that "all Republicans [Conservatives? Right-Wingers?] are not bigots, but the converse is almost certainly true - all bigots are Republicans..."
That very much fluctuates.
When Bigots Become Reformers:
The Progressive Era’s shameful record on race.
Is that the real Hypatia? If it is, just when you think she's regaining consciousness, she asstounds us all with something like that. From an idiotic Randian like Damon Root, no less. Incredible how she finds such discredited and nonsensical propaganda credible. It appeals to he bias and justifies her still distorted world view.
Facing South has a good stor on the NO election:
ReplyDeletehttp://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2006/05/new-at-reconstruction-watch-new.asp
Hypatia...Bush actually does like and embrace Hispanics, but a large sector of his base is virulently anti-Hispanic.
ReplyDeleteYour brain on libertarian idiotarianism. Bush would embrace anyone who espouses his bankrupt ideas and failed policies. Even a cross dressing, devil worshipping, gay necrophiliac, hermaphroditic, hispanic. A more "traditional" person who disagrees with incompetence and bullshit is "an evil doer". You really are a bit too naive and gullible, aren't you?
Oh, come on, according to Rush Limbaugh Mayor Naygor doesn’t even live in New Orleans he lives in Dallas
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows that.
the funny thing to me about all this is i've had the good fortune to meet both landrieu and nagin (i produced a movie in NO last year and they were both involved somehow) and guess what; they were both smart hard working interesting guys. i recall, vaguely, that one was white and the other black, but i also recall that nagin came in as a republican, sort of, but certainly as a technocrat, to get rid of the taint of corruption that was umm, to put it mildly, a stench over the city. his first election had little to do with race.
ReplyDeleteand further, i'd say that nagin's stupid and intemperate comments about "chocolate city" are only so on the surface. let's think rationally about what happened: a city's population was decimated but only the black people's homes were truly destroyed. surely that is grounds to say some things that might be a bit over the top without having to dump appelations such as "racist" on nagin, who is the least black-nationalist type imaginable. he's a businessman and a technocrat, or a wannabe technocrat.
the low level of analysis on right wing sites is just depressing. no research is done, no original thinking is displayed, no knee can jerk hard enough.
I think there are several things outsiders need to understand.
ReplyDeleteFirst, Nagin was elected with a coalition of blacks and white Republicans. He became the candidate that the Conservatives wanted in office. Many people were impressed with the Republican candidate Rob Couhig, who immediately endorsed Nagin for the runoff. Many other people also like the ideas of very liberal attorney Virginia Boulet. In the last week of the campaign, she also endorsed Nagin and offered to help, although she turned down an actual job.
Second, when Nagin made his chocolate city comment, their was an ugly racism spreading through the city. You could hear it in too many conversations. The above commenter is wrong to say that only black people's homes were truly destroyed. He clearly has not seen what happened to largely white, upper middle class neighborhood of Lakeview. On the other, Lakeview has a lower elevation that the Lower 9th Ward. Nobody talks about turing the white neighborhood into green space.
When Nagin made the chocolate city, many of us were secretly proud that we had a major who would quote a Parlament song.
On a bright note, we kicked out half the city council. Entrenched politicians were replaced by successful professionals.
For the people claiming that New Orleans has no interest in change, I'd like to know when your town last voted out half the city government?
The irony of right-wing attacks on Nagin is that it's increasingly clear that in the final weeks of the campaign, Nagin forged a coalition with conservative Louisiana Republicans who saw Nagin as more of an ally than the more traditionally liberal Landrieu.
ReplyDeletePlus, it was and should remain a Dem bastion in a GOP hellhole (Louisiana).
ReplyDeleteMaybe, I don't disagree, but NOLA is not out of the woods yet -- absentee ballots will not be allowed for ever and there are HUGE obstacles for many to overcome before they can rebuild.
And rebuilt rental units will not have rents that the former residents are likely to be able to afford -- we may see it become enough of a republican stronghold to to keep LA solidly "red" yet.
Clearly, current policies are working towards that outcome even if mayor Nagen is re-elected this time.
Even a cross dressing, devil worshipping, gay necrophiliac, hermaphroditic, hispanic.
ReplyDeleteThese are the folks that are actually BEHIND chimpy and his policies.... Clearly no one that stands "in front of the curtain" is competent enough to have pulled off the theft and fraud that the chimperor and gang have perpetrated on the U.S.
The real evil-doers are the ones behind this administration - and perhaps you have just precisely identified them.
Oh, come on, according to Rush Limbaugh Mayor Naygor doesn’t even live in New Orleans he lives in Dallas
ReplyDeleteSo does lush bimbo have anything to say about anne coulter's fake address and felony voting fraud?
the low level of analysis on right wing sites is just depressing.
ReplyDeleteWell, its not like you can really research lies and slander....
After all, research is about finding facts and truth.
How odd? Hypatia links to this Damon Root person to suggest that progressives are racists. I call bullshit and say it's propaganda, outright lies. I find an article by this Root person at the Objectivist Center (Creating an Atlas Society!):
ReplyDeleteAgainst Pacifism
by Damon W. Root
In 1941, with Hitler’s war machine furiously hacking Western civilization to bits, George Orwell famously observed that "objectively, the pacifist is pro-Nazi."
A little googling turns up the entire quote:
Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively the pacifist is pro-Nazi. - George Orwell
My, my! Look at all the lovely places we find this quote(some of Hype's favorite places). Where does it come from? What work of Orwell's is it from?
The #1 hit is Wiki Quote...
Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively the pacifist is pro-Nazi.
No, Not One (1941)
But we can assume that it's origin is someplace else, and it got slipped into wiki like that quote from Norman Thomas that Reagan, or one of his people actually made up.
No, Not One (1941). OK, lets google that. Nothing. No. Not one.
Perhaps the learned Hype can help me out here. I have searched all the complete works of Orwell at several sites and have yet to find this book, essay or article. No. Not one.
Maybe it's just me. Or maybe there is a reason I never believe a word coming from the mouth of any Randian, libertarian, conservative or Republican. Hype?
Right you are about racists being racists on Powerline, et al. It's nothing more nor less than was expected from them. Right you are also about their ignorance of why Nagin was reelected, not that ignorance would stop them from flaunting their...ignorance.
ReplyDeleteNagin did what needed to be done prior to Katrina, organizing to get most people to the designated shelters of schools and other public facilities. He did everything he was supposed to do to the point where, if things worsened to such a degree, he could then handoff the effort largely to FEMA's "organized" response - as per city/federal plan!
Nagin's only fault, in my opinion, was to believe for a little too long that the promised federal help would arrive in a way that would be timely, though even that could really be considered understandable.
After all, who would have believed before Katrina that such agreed-to federal aid would be actively denied by those in charge for greater political purposes (red-state gain, attempt to gain presidential control of state Guard forces, political philosophy)?
Now Nagin knows, and so does everyone else, everyone not a willful racist, that is.
RE: my previous (Bigot=Republican)post - I figured I'd toss that one out fully cognizant of the possibility that someone more articulate and better informed than I am might disabuse me of my misguided notion... So far, though, there seems to be general agreement?
ReplyDeleteTorture for the Greater Good
ReplyDeleteDayton served as the director of the Defense HUMINT Service (HUMINT=human intelligence) within the Defense Intelligence Agency. He was also a political-military operative, a defense attaché in Moscow, and spent some time at the Council on Foreign Relations where he worked on arms control matters. According to the New York Times, "Major General Keith Dayton of the DIA had primary responsibility for the interrogation of Iraqi prisoners designated as high-value targets. CIA employees would likely have participated in certain interrogations, according to intelligence experts. A CIA official told The New York Times that the agency was involved in the interrogation of no more than two dozen individuals at Abu Ghraib between September and December 2003." And that quote was from his old buddies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
That's no surprise since back in May 2003 Dayton indicated that the ISG's job involved exploitation and interrogation. "the ISG will collect and exploit documents and media related to terrorism, war crimes, POW [prisoner of war] and MIA [missing in action] issues, and other things relating to the former Iraqi regime. It will interrogate and debrief individuals, both hostile and friendly, and it will exploit captured materiel. The goal is to put all the pieces together in what is appearing to be a very complex jigsaw puzzleThe main effort is going to be in Iraq, with the headquarters in Baghdad. This collection operation will include a joint interrogation debriefing center, a joint materiel exploitation center, chemical and biological intelligence support teams and the ISG operation center. The main analytic effort will be co-located with CENTCOM forward, as will the combined media processing center. Furthermore, the ISG is going to have liaison elements with CJTF-7 [Commander Joint Task Force 7] in Kuwait and with other U.S. government agencies inside Iraq. And finally, the intelligence fusion center will be here in Washington, D.C. And all are going to be linked electronically."
Coincidently, Dayton left the ISG on December 7, 2004, after the ISG "intelligence fusion center" the parallel intelligence operation of Rumsfeld and Cambone-knew that the TortureGate scandal was about to break and their man Dayton was involved. Thanks to humanrightsfirst.org, Rumsfeld's twenty-four detention facilities used in the "Global War on Terror"-including sites in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Jordan, and aboard U.S. Navy warships like the USS Bataan-were exposed and demonstrated that the Bush administration is quite capable of running Soviet-style Gulags.
American Doctor Mengele's Wanted
On March 30, 2004, Charles Duelfer, Director of Central Intelligence Special Advisor for Strategy regarding Iraqi Destruction WMD Programs-the new civilian lead for the ISG-indicated that the ISG had to try harder to pry information out of suspected Iraqi WMD specialists on the rationale that they had been trained not to talk about them. Duelfer is a resident expert at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington, which is headed by former Democratic Representative Lee Hamilton, the co-chair of the 911 Commission. From 1993 to 2000, Duelfer was deputy executive chairman of the UN Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM). The UNSCOM team was withdrawn from Iraq in 1998 after reports emerged that the team had deviated from its charter to find WMDs and was involved in espionage against Iraqi government communications on behalf of U.S. intelligence agencies. The search for physical evidence of WMDs was nullified by Duelfer with the new focus being intent-to-build. "I arrived on the 12th of February 2004. I have endeavored to refine the strategy for ISG in the weeks since. In its simplest terms, my strategy is to determine the regime's intentions for all the activities ISG has uncovered. The people we need to speak to have spent their entire professional lives being trained not to speak about WMD. Most of those in the ISG are not experts on Iraq, and most do not have extensive experience in the kinds of investigative operations and analysis they are asked to undertake."
Rumsfeld's Likely Recruits
"Investigative operations" is just another term for the torture of a non-white population. Most Americans are appalled by the torture of fellow human beings and, happily, that means it is going to be hard to find anyone with the "extensive experience" needed to bleed information out of a suspected WMD practitioner. However, given the misplaced anxiety of Americans that the devil is out to get 'em, it's easy to think about the most nightmarish of scenarios. One can only imagine that the ISG and its defense contractors are recruiting heavily from that minority of Americans who populate the despicable Aryan Nations, and other white supremacist groups like the Ku Klux Klan, who would jump at the chance to torture non-whites. And, not surprisingly, their numbers are rising.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, "Buoyed by rising numbers of Skinhead and Klan groups, the American radical right staged something of a comeback last year, following a tumultuous period that saw the destruction or hobbling of some of the nation's leading hate groups. As 2003 came to an end, the number of racist skinhead groups had doubled over the prior year. The neo-Nazi Aryan Nations, despite having lost its Idaho compound, boasted 11 new chapters. A newcomer on the scene, Arkansas-based White Revolution, had grown much more powerful and seemed poised to keep rising. Several new Klan groups had appeared, and Klan activity was significant." They also reported that the number of "hate websites" have increased by six percent.
The potential recruitment pool in the USA among American racist organizations, incited by George Bush and many American "holy land" ideologues in power in Washington, DC, makes for bad dreams. Middle Ages Crusade propaganda still sells! Add to that the constant propaganda about "the other races hate our way of life" (might they want to charge a fair price for fuel) vomited from the US news media and the madness of Rumsfeld's worldview (imagine the idiocy of a Rumsfeld who could marvel that US soldiers have digital cameras and that he stands-up for 8 to10 hours a day so, then why can't prisoners?)-makes one wonder about his connection to reality. So goes the DOD.
Recent evidence offered by General Janis Karpinski, NGO's and investigative reporters, indicates that Israeli interrogators may have been active in Iraqi detention centers. But the Israeli government has stated that any Israelis in Iraq were there on their own. We are inclined to believe them to a point. The problem is that it gives rise to the specter that anti-Arab Israeli xenophobes, including members of the racist and terrorist Kach and Kahane Chai, were participating as either freelance torturers in Iraq or as part of a parallel intelligence operation -- separate from Mossad -- being run out of Ariel Sharon's office. They, like their American counterparts, make for great recruits. The scary part is that neither government can control them-or, perhaps, does not want to get involved.
Unfortunately, the question of the legality of Rumsfeld's personal intelligence operation in TortureGate, and all the connections, has received the glancing interest of Congress and the US media. But as more evidence of the illegal nature of the Pentagon's operations comes to light, and that of its associates, there is a clear need for the International Criminal Court to conduct its own investigation of the role of Rumsfeld's ersatz intelligence operation in committing human rights abuses in Iraq and elsewhere around the world.
John Stanton is a Virginia-based writer specializing in national security and political matters.
These are the kind of bottom feeders you associate with and take at face value Hypatia. Because you want to believe. The same propagandists, revisionists, (bullshitters) frauds and liars, like Haynes and Klehr.
ReplyDeleteAnd you wonder why people laugh at you around here...
Even the late Norman Thomas, who was elated when he saw FDR embrace and even introduce many of the policies he had advocated in his run for President under the Socialist Party banner, was aware of the transformation of the Democrat Party. In fact he has been quoted as saying:
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." Norman Thomas, former U.S. Socialist Presidential Candidate
Find where Norman said that and I will pay you $1000.00.
Don't bother, Glen. Asking white people to give up racism is like asking republicans to give up, er, racism.
ReplyDeleteIt's just the way white folks are.
The only bigotry we conservatives are displaying is bigotry against the foolishness of not only Ray Nagin, but the people he stands with. Such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan.
ReplyDeleteIf you think standing up to such is racial bigtry, than the real biggots have you fooled. Yes they played on race and only did it becaues the challenger was a White man. Don't fault Conservatives for pointing it out.
In the post cited by Glenn I fully document how Jesse Jackson promised a lawsuit. Well Glenn, I hope you call Jesse and file that lawsuit. But of course we know that's not going to happen. For Jesse it was about nothing but getting a pawn into office and playing race to do it.
I fully document Nagin's ties with Louis F. in another post at:
http://www.independentconservative.com/2005/10/02/farrakhan1/
Nagin getting back is not going to be the best for New Orleans. Not that his challenger was much better, but at least he would not be locking arms with known racists like Nagin is doing.
We know Louis F. hates Jews and Jesse's H-town comment showed where he stands.
bamage said...
ReplyDeleteRE: my previous (Bigot=Republican)post - I figured I'd toss that one out fully cognizant of the possibility that someone more articulate and better informed than I am might disabuse me of my misguided notion... So far, though, there seems to be general agreement?
Why stop at bigot? Archie Bunker was a bigot and he was a lovable, if irascible, guy. They are so much more. Liars, cons, pedophiles, thieves, libertarians, fascists, cultists, sociopaths... I'm sure I am leaving something out.
Plagiarists. I forgot that one.
ReplyDeleteDarnell said...
ReplyDeleteThe only bigotry we conservatives Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Nagin was a Republican once. You know as well as anyone how old habits die hard.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeletethe low level of analysis on right wing sites is just depressing.
Well, its not like you can really research lies and slander....
After all, research is about finding facts and truth.
Yes you can research it, and believe me, that's what most of it is. Never ever accept anything from the right as fact until you have checked it out thoroughly. Nothing. You can even have a network of librarians and academics do it for you... here.
By the way, comparing Nagin to Barry has a foundation in historical fact. I don't know how many of you lived in or near DC at the time he was running for re-election, but the campaign was similar to Nagin's.
ReplyDeleteBarry's supporters claimed his position was being attacked by racists. Similar to Nagin's statements that his White challenger was trying to "turn back the clock". ("Turn back the clock" being a term used against Whites when Blacks wish to play on White Guilt and Black fears. It's a racist act to try and imply that Whites can't hold office in a Black area without desires to destroy Black people. Trying to paint Whites as inherently evil.)
Both Nagin and Barry's re-election efforts played on race, to stir up a base of support amongst Blacks. Barry simply labeled challengers as people who were working on behalf of Whites that did not like him. All the same game, but only the names were changed.
Of course when this racial game is played and properly identified by Conservatives, along comes a Liberal to try and imply it is the Conservatives that are being "racists". Or "bigots", but we know you want to say "racists". This trick by Liberals is old and no longer working.
Everyone sees the racial games played by so-called Black leaders and attempts to defend those games make Liberals look like the people they claim Conservatives are.
If there is a Conservative using this for some motive based in racial hatred, it is the actions of people like Nagin and Barry that loaded their guns with ammo. Bottom line is that the critics of Nagin and Barry have good reason to be critical and they have my FULL SUPPORT.
I find the same sort of wave of hatred can erupt at the very fact that it is now politically incorrect to reffer to blacks in a racist way- as if the mere label of it is what makes it wrong. Many still believe that the world was a better place when you could still call a black man a n***** to his face. A term, by the way, which is still often uttered by whites where I live, in the northern midwest! (when there aren't any n*****s around of course).
ReplyDeleteThis country is in serious denial about how much further we have to go.
Someone afraid to identify themselves said:
ReplyDeleteNagin was a Republican once. You know as well as anyone how old habits die hard.
I don't know if you live in the South, but I do. And the racists that instituted Jim Crow and defended Slavery before that were Democrats. So when it comes to "habits", he's joined a party with a much longer history of the habit of playing on race.
Darnell said...
ReplyDeleteThe only bigotry we conservatives are displaying is...
What do you mean "we," black man?
Did your ancestors fight for Confederate Army against the North, too?
This ridiculous nonsense is shilled by this clown.
Blacks Who Fought For the South
Source: This article appeared in the Washington Times some years back. It was written by Walter Williams, an economics professor at George Mason University, a nationally syndicated columnist, an African-American, and one of the most effective speakers I have ever heard!
These people are truly sick, black or white. I can understand the motivations for the capo, the Jews who worked for the nazis at the death camps. But these fools just do it for the money. There is big money in spouting this bullshit if you are black. Token much?
History gives lie to myth of black Confederate soldiers
A racist fabrication has sprung up in the last decade: that the Confederacy had "thousands" of African- American slaves "fighting" in its armies during the Civil War.
Unfortunately, even some African-American men today have gotten conned into Putting on Confederate uniforms to play "re-enactors" in an army that fought to ensure that their ancestors would remain slaves.
There are two underlying points of this claim: first, to say that slavery wasn't so bad, because after all, the slaves themselves fought to preserve the slave South; and second, that the Confederacy wasn't really fighting for slavery. Both these notions may make some of our contemporaries feel good, but neither is historically accurate.
A black man voting Republican is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders. A black man getting elected as a Republican is just a cynical opportunist.
Darnell said...
ReplyDeleteSomeone afraid to identify themselves said:
Nagin was a Republican once. You know as well as anyone how old habits die hard.
I don't know if you live in the South, but I do. And the racists that instituted Jim Crow and defended Slavery before that were Democrats. So when it comes to "habits", he's joined a party with a much longer history of the habit of playing on race.
And you are about to witness another major realignment of the two major parties again. In your own lifetime, even. It's happened so many times in the last 200 years or so it would make your head spin. In your case, spin faster. It's been nice playing with you, Darnell, but since I'm a white man who is blacker than you, it's just not fair to you.
"Libertarians" are just lying liars that don't think they are getting enough cash from the repugs.
ReplyDeleteThey are really all the same crowd though, stealing what they can, lying about it, and proclaiming that no one else has any rights to stop them.
Both philosophies boil down to "SCREW YOU, I GOT MINE!"
Darnell said...
ReplyDeleteBy the way, comparing Nagin to Barry has a foundation in historical fact. I don't know how many of you lived in or near DC at the time he was running for re-election, but the campaign was similar to Nagin's.
Darnell swings... he misses!
Try juicing. It helped Bonds' game.
From the guy who wrote the book. Comment #53, Rick Perlstein. Run on over there, Darnell. It's a live chat at FDL. As long as you don't have a problem with Jews...
Frank #45, have you read the book? It’s a quirk of history that Goldwater didn’t pander to racists in 1964. He didn’t want to. But he didn’t have to. He was naive enough–he was a naive man, one of the reason’s he’s fascinating–to believe that it was enought to say he wasn’t personally racist (he wasn’t) for his success not to be based on racism.
But his success was based on racism.
He voted against the landmark 1964 civil rights act. Most Republicans voted for it. That was the act that outlawed public segregation. He said it was unconstitutional (it wasn’t).
87 percent of Mississippians then voted for him, the same year they were also burning dozens of churches that were voter registration headquarters.
Talk to a conservative now, and they’ll say 87 percent of Mississippians switched from Democrat to Republican because they suddenly became constiutional scholars.
And Goldwater did plenty of dog whistle politics in the home stretch. He appeared on the platform with one guy in Louisiana who was so racist he was excommunicated from the Catholic Church for it!
(Leander Perez, look it up, wingnuts cite him as the precedent for why pro-choice Democrats should be excommunicated).
To the one afraid to identify himself:
ReplyDeleteYou're "I'm Blacker than you" games are simply the oldest game in the book in an effort to imply that Blacks must think the way you feel they must think. But sorry, you are not and never will be Black.
To KKK
It was the Democrats that allied themselves with the Confederacy. It was the Republican President named Lincoln that caused them to leave the Union.
Beleive it or not, there were Blacks that owned slaves and Blacks owned slaves in Africa, then sold them to Europeans to bring to America. Blacks also faught with the Confederacy. Having said that, I am not backer of the Confederacy. I vote my view and could care less if there is an "R" or a "D" attached to the candidates.
These games to imply that a Black simply "can't be" a Republican though deserve the same statement I made to the person above who hides who they are.
I don't support this guy's view, but I support his right to have the opinion and still be a "Black" man.
http://www.geocities.com/tnudc/edgerton.html
He's Black. His view may not be one that some including me agree with, but he's Black just the same.
The Blacks that held Black slaves were not "White". They were Black too. And in history classes in many African nations they don't hide that fact.
bamage said...
ReplyDeleteRE: my previous (Bigot=Republican)post - I figured I'd toss that one out fully cognizant of the possibility that someone more articulate and better informed than I am might disabuse me of my misguided notion... So far, though, there seems to be general agreement?
I wouldn't claim to speak for any type of concensus around here, but I find that idea patently absurd.
Republicans have no monopoly on foolishness and hate.
George Wallace was a completely viable Democratic candidate for President in the oh-so-distant 1970's on a platform consisting of racism and some other things that weren't nearly as important as the racism.
To the Anonymous guy attacking Hypatia - maybe go back and read her post? I don't have any idea what you are objecting to, other than your notion that the piece she quoted was written by somebody you don't like? She's (I guess I always assumed Hypatia was a she? Not even sure if that is correct) perfectly capable of defending her position, but as it touches on what I am writing about...
Liberals, Democrats, Whigs, have been just as likely to be racist and hateful as Republicans, Conservatives, Tories. This is not something you can pass off - we are all equally culpable (in the historic sense). To write the present effects of the "Peculiar Institution" off onto one party is overly simplistic and sloppy, jingoistic and ultimately unproductive.
Certainly in present day (2006) America, it is far more likely to be successful as a Republican with an overt message of hate and racism (so, for example, David Duke, and that idiot in North Carolina, I forget his name), but this is no cause for celebration on the part of the Democrats. The absence of overt racism does not mean that the party doesn't still have racial and/or racist tendencies and institutions.
Racism and bigotry are way more subtle and powerful than a slogan, or a word, or a political party.
And to whoever brought up the fact that "Chocolate City" is a quote from a George Clinton/ Parliament/ Funkadelic song of the same name, ...Amen!! I loved this quote when I heard it, but realized pretty quickly that this was not gonna play very well anywhere where people didn't know the song or understand it's roots.
Oh, Marion Barry. I thought you meant Goldwater. Bwahahaha. Go away, Darnell. get blog hits by writing something original, OK? GOP talking points are a dime a dozen, and who is really surprised that NOLA and D.C. elect black mayors. That's not news, that's demographics.
ReplyDeleteis "independent conservative" the most laughable oximoron you have ever seen?
ReplyDeleteLike marching behind the chimperor, the treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and constant "flip flops" on every other issue is some form of "independence"
LOL
And more proof some Blacks did side with the Confederacy:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.blackconfederates.com/
Not that I agree with their stance, but I still see them as Blacks just the same.
OK folks, I have said what I came to say. Thank you Glenn for allowing me to respond.
By the way, comparing Nagin to Barry has a foundation in historical fact.
ReplyDeletePretty good propaganda, moron, link someone you want to slander with someone else by making some tangent, meaningless connection -- actually, one that doesn't exist.
Then, use that misleading comparison to "catapult" the lie that these 2 are also similar in other, criminal ways.
Bet it flies on your site and with the wingnuts, but we see though you here.
(I guess I always assumed Hypatia was a she? Not even sure if that is correct) perfectly capable of defending her position, but as it touches on what I am writing about...
ReplyDeleteYes she is, so what's your point? Aside from the startling revelation that a name "Hypatia" didn't give you a clue. You do seem a bit clueless at times. We were talking about progressives. A political party started by a Republican named Teddy Roosevelt, BTW, in 1912. You want to bring other issues into it, fine. But I think you may be in over your head here. And politicians pick parties based on which affiliation is likely to get them elected. you don't really think they believe all the crap they spout, do you?
Jerome
ReplyDeleteI find the Nagin connection to Republicans interesting ... it was noted by others that he supported Bush in the past. But, a reasonable middle ground is sometimes not the tact taken by some blowhards.
ReplyDeleteThe black pride stuff given all that they suffered in the hurricane aftermath btw does not seem a bad thing either. For those who saw it in this perspective in the comments, I concur. Lines can be crossed with such rhetoric, but given the "heritage" saw white Southerners promote, ridiculing it is a double edged sword. ...
unless the message was supposed to be hypocrisy.
Southern strategy
ReplyDeleteIn American politics, the Southern strategy refers to the focus of the Republican party on winning U.S. Presidential elections by securing the electoral votes of the U.S. Southern states, ostensibly by making racial appeals to southerners. The phrase Southern strategy itself, was invented by Nixon strategist Kevin Phillips. For the years of 1948 to 1984, the southern states, traditionally a stronghold for the Democratic Party became key swing states, providing the popular vote margins in the Presidential elections 1960, 1968 and 1976. During this era, several Republican candidates expressed support for states' rights, which critics have argued was intended as a signal of opposition to federal civil rights legislation for blacks. This strategy was largely a success, and the South is now considered a Republican stronghold.
Recently, the term has been used in a more general sense, in which cultural themes are used in an election — primarily but not exclusively in the American South. In the past, phases such as "busing" or "law and order," or "states rights" were used. Today appeals largely focus on cultural issues like gay marriage, abortion, and religion. Yet, the use of the term, and its meaning and implication, are still hotly disputed... more
Conservative Independence is two words accidentally put together.
ReplyDeleteConservatives In (a state of) Dependence.
Nick writes: ? She's (I guess I always assumed Hypatia was a she? Not even sure if that is correct) perfectly capable of defending her position, but as it touches on what I am writing about...
ReplyDeleteYeah, I be girl. Racism, xenophobia etc. are human afflictions, and I don't think hardly anyone, including victims of these, is immune. The impulse might even have constituted a competitive advantage back in the mists of time. It just is no longer useful to fear/hate the Other, and instead has launched modern abominations.
FYI nick
ReplyDeleteDespite these significant shortcomings, The Progressive Era and Race deserves careful attention. The Progressive movement unleashed, aided, and abetted some of the most destructive forces in 20th-century America. The better we understand this history, the less likely we are to repeat it.
Perhaps it is this sentiment that irritates the other commenters. It is from the article Hypatia linked to earlier. The evil progressives -- including Carter Glass, who helped bring about the Federal Reserve -- last headed by whom? -- are evil. The result of a dog chasing its tail? Circular motion.
Anyone out there care to dig up racist comments from the Objectivist corner? You could probably find a few at the Pamala "Atlas" blog.
In the end, this is just another smelly fish thrown into the comments by the "gotcha" queen.
Hypatia... Yeah, I be girl. Racism, xenophobia etc. are human afflictions, and I don't think hardly anyone, including victims of these, is immune.
ReplyDeleteYes, we all have these demons and prejudices. The difference is in how we confront them and deal with them. The ugliness is in using them to exploit a political agenda. I see that questionable Orwell quote over at Frontpage frequently. Care to verify it.
Ann Coulter... During World War II, George Orwell said of England's pacifists: "Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively, the pacifist is pro-Nazi."
Or perhaps explain why it was OK for Joe McCarthy to be pro-Nazi.
Good article but you got your facts wrong on one thing about Barry. He was caught on camera doing crack, but it wasn't with hookers, it was with a former girlfriend. Bad enough, but no need to exaggerate.
ReplyDeleteDorita said...
ReplyDeleteFYI nick
Despite these significant shortcomings, The Progressive Era and Race deserves careful attention. The Progressive movement unleashed, aided, and abetted some of the most destructive forces in 20th-century America. The better we understand this history, the less likely we are to repeat it.
Unbelievable. Especially coming from a person who has no clue about the history other than her particular revisionist version and total fabrications.
Bush actually does like and embrace Hispanics
ReplyDeleteThis one part is what I cannot figure out. I can't get this mentality at all. It's my "soilent green" moment: we are all people. I mean, really, if W didn't like and embrace Hispanics, would that truly affect his views on immigration? What about all "the Other" non-Hispanic immigrants?
Anyone who doesn't realize the huge component of racism involved in the sudden jihad against illegal immigrants
jihad?
Unbelievable. I know that you know what that word means and yet you use it in this way all the same.
The Nagin re-election gave them an excuse to spew racist sentiments they normally have the sense to refrain from
And per usual, you use the slightest opportunity as an excuse to drag Objectivist links into the comments.
Carter Glass
ReplyDeleteFrom anon:
ReplyDeleteUnbelievable. Especially coming from a person
Do you mean me or Hypatia? A guy wrote the article, so I'm guessing you aren't referring to him.
Just askin' :)
The term "Objectivist" gives that cultist pseudo-philosophy a veneer of legitimacy it does not merit. I prefer the term, "Randian".
ReplyDeletedorita said...
ReplyDeleteFrom anon:
Unbelievable. Especially coming from a person
Do you mean me or Hypatia? A guy wrote the article, so I'm guessing you aren't referring to him.
Just askin' :)
Not you! The gotcha queen. Thanks for that, BTW. It suits her majesty. :)
anon -- I realize that there is a history of racism in this country and I also realize that some of us are lucky enough to not live in the past, and also some who can see, yes and truly believe that all are equal. I have read the wiki entry. I was trying to make a point -- badly -- that the evil one (pointed out in the article linked to by Hypatia) was instrumental in creating the Federal Reserve, which Greenspan -- a noted Objetivist -- held the chairmanship of for many years.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that for almost every non-NSA post that Greenwald puts up, Hypatia drops the Objectivist bomb in the comments -- or trots out long debunked urban myths.
It's standard procedure here.
Get used to it:)
it wasn't with hookers, it was with a former girlfriend.
ReplyDeleteWell she COULD HAVE BEEN a hooker, so those that are trying to slander Nagen don't feel obligated to confuse the issues with details and facts.
After all, its all about "catapulting propaganda" anyhow.
I dunno about Republicans and bigotry, but I certainly agree with this quote from John Stuart Mill -
ReplyDelete“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”
Which makes the asinine commentary cited by Glenn on Nagin's election win, or on McCain's jeering, or Bart and Shooter's woodenheadedness, or even Dubya's forever "interesting" ability to supposedly "understand", infinitely comprehensible.
Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteYou do seem a bit clueless at times..."
This is probably as apt a description of myself as any I could think of.
I don't think this has as much to do with racism as it does with protecting conservatism. The failure to respond to Katrina and her victims at the national level (even now) is just another stain on the conservative philosophy of smaller government. Nagin was just a convenient scapegoat. He gave them someone to blame for the shortcomings of their own flawed agenda. That the voters of New Orleans would re-elect Nagin makes it harder to lay this all on him. After all, if he's such a lousy Mayor why'd they vote him back into office? It must therefor mean the citizens of NO (who just happen to be black) are themselves flawed, or inadequate, or substandard. This accounts for why we are seeing the anger at Nagin's re-election being expressed in such overtly racial terms in my view. It can never be the fault conservatism or Mr. Bush. It's the perfect philosophy with a leader who never makes mistakes.
ReplyDeleteA big turning point came in America when the phrase "politically correct" started to be used as a pejorative in the same way that the word "liberal" is now often used. It's an unfortunate fact of human nature that racial identity plays a big part of coalition politics and that there are plenty of people of all political persuasions who are willing to exploit the fact. What the phrase "politically correct" always implied to me was the general agreement that that particular fact of human nature was indeed unfortunate and that we should work to get past such considerations. Apparently my view of the situation has fallen quite out of fashion.
ReplyDeleteHpatia, you know I really enjoy the majority of your highly imformative posts on this blog.
ReplyDeleteWhen you write about those who are against immigration (you nelected to insert the word illegal), you state that not all who disagree with you on this issue are racists but you say the others are guilty of erroneous reasoning.
I disgree strongly. Illegal immigration is primarily an economic issue and one that will have a huge negative impact on the American economy, possibly a disastrous one.
There is simply no logic in going along with those in both parties who, to pursue their political agendas, are willing to sell out the future of the American Middle class in favor of politicians and corporatist favorites of government. Call them "The Power Elite."
A commenter mentioned Walter Williams. He is someone whose economic writings I have studied for years. I think he is a first rate thinker, an excellent economist (although I am not saying I agree with each and other political position of his) and he is most certainly not racist, an unprincipled careerist, or a sycophant.
He is an intellectual and a superb economist. Also very wise.
Tomorrow I will post a few of his excellent articles on the economic impact of illegal immigration. Now I post another article of his which says some things which are irrefutable although I don't think the commenters on this blog have open minds about these matters.
The power of the rich
Sep 1, 2004
by Walter E. Williams
The truly rich don't deserve all the political hype we hear; they're only a tiny percentage of our population and not that important. According to recent U.S. Treasury statistics, the top 1 percent of income earners have an adjusted gross income that starts around $300,000. While $300,000 or $400,000 a year is nothing to sneeze at, it's a far cry from being rich; it's not even yacht-and-Gulfstream-jet money. The truly rich Americans are those with assets like Bill Gates ($46 billion), Warren Buffett ($43 billion) and Paul Allen ($21 billion). All told, there are about 275 Americans in the billionaire club. Having just a couple of million dollars in assets won't get you much respect as a rich person.
The 99 percent plus of the rest of us can safely ignore the truly rich. Our attention is better focused on issues far more important to us instead of allowing politicians to divert our attention by getting us worked up over whether the rich are paying their fair share and so-called tax cuts for the rich. The reason we can ignore the rich is because they have little or no power over our lives.
Even if Gates, Buffett, Allen and the 272 other billionaires pooled their assets, what could they make you and me do? Could they force you to bus your kid to a school across town? Could they force you to abandon use of your property so as to provide an abode for some endangered species? Could they force you to wear a seat belt when you drive? Or could they force you into the government's retirement program? All by themselves, billionaires and millionaires have little power over us compared to the awesome power that politicians and midlevel government bureaucrats have over us. They can force us to do many things that we otherwise wouldn't do.
"All by themselves" is the operative phrase. The rich can get power over us, but they must first spend their resources to get permission from our elected representatives to rip us off. Wealthy corporate executives can use their wealth and influence to get politicians to rig markets in their favor -- like keeping foreign sugar out so they can charge us higher prices and earn more profit.
They can convince politicians to enact laws and regulations and create special privileges that benefit them and their allies at the expense of the rest of us. Donald Trump got politicians to use laws of eminent domain to throw Vera Coking, an elderly widow, out of her Atlantic City, N.J., home to make room for expansion of his casino. Had it not been for the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Justice, Atlantic City officials would have succeeded.
We might be tempted to blame the rich. I say no. In the example of Donald Trump, had he privately tried to take Vera Coking's house, he would have been arrested and sent to jail. He avoids that risk by getting politicians under the color of law to do the same thing. In this case, we should blame politicians much more than Donald Trump.
Finally, there's one thing that I truly don't understand. America's leftists, whether they are heads-full-of-mush college students and their professors, politicians, civil rights activists or union leaders, just love to beat up on the rich. But there's something they need to explain.
Why are so many of their heroes rich and super rich? Most leftists, unionists and ex-flower children support John Kerry's candidacy. It turns out that if Kerry becomes president, he'll be the richest president in U.S. history and his vice president a multimillionaire. Leftists also idolize and worship the Hollywood rich and other rich people in the sports and entertainment industries. I'd like to know their criteria for which rich deserve our condemnation and which don't.
As for me, I have nothing against rich people. In fact, I've been struggling most of my life to join them.
When looking for "useful idiots" one must look equally on the "left" and the "right."
kkk , (and your pathetic "anon" post at 9:31 and all your other vicious posts.) You come here on this blog under various guises and call some of the best, most intelligent people in America "clowns." That seems to be stylistic of you and your gang at frontpage.mag.
ReplyDeleteI suspect you are a troll whose mission is to discredit the writers who pose the biggest threat to you and your ilk.
They are principled, patriotic, highly intelligent thinkers and you are none of those.
Please keep using that same kkk moniker so I can scroll by your posts more easily.
Is that pompous enough for you, you evil, rage-filled threat to America?
If not, I'll be clearer next time.
"anon" at 11:51. (kkk, etc. ad nauseum)
ReplyDeleteYup. I knew it. Guess I had that right.
I think you'll feel more at home at frontpage.com, among your own.
Or go commiserate with William F. Buckley.
Fairly obviously, a main reason why would be that residents who want New Orleans to survive culturally as well as physically believe that Mayor Nagin has that goal as his very own.
ReplyDeleteNew Orleans voters are, in other words, voting their legitimate politics. They are voting their own interests, their CULTURAL interests. They don't trust the Lt. Gov., and part of the reason is his sister.
Landrieu's sister just voted for the English-only bill, one of 11 Dem Senators, all usual suspects, who did so. If there's a Democratic policy in that vote, I'll eat my hat. What do they mean, 'Democrat'?
New Orleans, like Los Angeles, is a city of immigrants.
· Black or African American - 67%
· French (except Basque) - 6%
· German - 6%
· Irish - 5%
· English - 4%
· Italian - 3%
· Vietnamese - 2%
· Subsaharan African - 1%
· African - 1%
· Other Hispanic or Latino - 1%
· Scotch-Irish - 1%
· Central American: - 1%
· Scottish - 1%
· Polish - 1%
· French Canadian - 1%
· Mexican - 1%
http://tinyurl.com/ly475
Another funny thing is that these wingers argue (they do not think) that blacks are somehow odd if they act defensive!
Meanwhile, the wingers want people to think that there is an attack on White Christmas. Who's kidding whom?
Eyes Wide Open said...
ReplyDeleteHpatia, you know I really enjoy the majority of your highly imformative posts on this blog Zzzzzzzzz....
More than a few people here ridicule the two of you because you are both ridiculous. On the a scale of 1 to 10, it's difficult to say who is more ridiculous, you and Hypatia or Bart, Shooter, Dog and Fly. They are a full three ring circus. You and Hypatia are just a dog and pony show. All of you are a greater threat to this country than Bush. He is over, done. All of you, on the other hand, will dutifully elect the next clown the fascists on the right will nominate. Collectively, you are all a greater threat than any terrorists, foreign or domestic. You are mindless zombies.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteEyes Wide Open said...
Hpatia, you know I really enjoy the majority of your highly imformative posts on this blog Zzzzzzzzz....
More than a few people here ridicule the two of you because you are both ridiculous.
Actually, most people here just ignore EWO. He is ridiculous and a danger only to himself. Hypatia is a danger to others as well as herself.
Glenn writes:
ReplyDeleteAll they know is that they excitedly see an opportunity where they think this sort of spiteful racial commentary -- which is normally beyond the bounds of what is acceptable -- is permissible here, and they can't pass up the chance to spew playground epithets about Ray Nagin's race and about the intellectual level of the voters who re-elected him.
My question is this: is what is “acceptable” and “permissible” changing in this country?
I think it is, and since Katrina and the immigration rallies I think that open racism has become more acceptable on the right – albeit when cloaked in “economic” or “legal” arguments – but it is still racism, and the spiteful “playground epithets” just go to prove it.
David Neiwert points out that both Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter have cited as sources leaders of hate groups as “authorities on immigration.” He writes:
That's where this country is in our discussion on race today: we assume that if someone isn't wearing a hood and burning a cross, they and their rhetoric can't possibly be racist. But that's what today's cuter, cuddlier racists are counting on. Dress up the racism, make it sound nice and friendly, drop racist cartoons of dirty brown people huddling under sombreros in favor of a nice, complimentary message that the Hispanics simply are doing more than their fair share and we should lift a little of the burden, and you can put it on Fox News. Hide a hateful white supremacist inside an attractive Filipina, and she can be the country's most popular conservative blogger.
And that is why it is so important for these racists to claim that racism is dead.
If something doesn’t exist, then they can’t be accused of it right? Right?
EWO --- A commenter mentioned Walter Williams. He is someone whose economic writings I have studied for years. I think he is a first rate thinker, an excellent economist (although I am not saying I agree with each and other political position of his) and he is most certainly not racist, an unprincipled careerist, or a sycophant.
ReplyDeleteHe is an intellectual and a superb economist. Also very wise.
Tomorrow I will post a few of his excellent articles on the economic impact of illegal immigration. Now I post another article of his which says some things which are irrefutable although I don't think the commenters on this blog have open minds about these matters.
Spare us, you ignorant buffoon. We are trying to marginalize dangerous wingnuts like Williams, who nobody would know or care about if he hadn't been on Rush Limbaugh so often... You might even be dangerous if you managed to get on Limbaugh, because the millions of morons who still listen to him just don't know any better. Kind of like you. If it's in the Washington Times or on roght wing radio, it must be true. Are you a Moonie, too? Hey, why don't you get your own blog to "catapult the propaganda"?
Walter E. "Wingnut" Williams (born 1936) is an American economist. He received his Ph.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles in 1972. He has been a Professor of Economics at George Mason University since 1980, and chairman of that University's Economic's department from 1995 to 2001. Previously, he has been on the faculty of Los Angeles City College, California State University - Los Angeles, Temple University, and Grove City College. Williams is known for his outspoken libertarian and sometimes conservative views. He is a popular columnist and author of books aimed at a general audience, and is a very popular occasional guest host of Rush Limbaugh's radio program and Lawrence Kudlow's Kudlow & Company TV program.
Some fans consider it noteworthy that Williams is African-American but is conservative in his political beliefs. Williams is a champion of Black education, frequently indicting the educational systems of inner city schools for perpetuating, in his words, a fraud against African-American students and families by lowered standards. Williams is also an outspoken critic of the minimum wage and affirmative action, believing that both practices are detrimental to blacks. Williams especially emphasizes his belief that racism and the legacy of slavery in the United States are overemphasized as problems faced by the black community and do not adequately explain the situation blacks face today.
Like most conservatives and libertarians, Williams criticizes gun control as endangering the innocent and failing to reduce crime.
Williams praises capitalism (of a laissez-faire variety) as being the most moral and most productive system man has ever devised. "Capitalism is relatively new in human history. Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man." For more see Capitalism and the Common Man.
Williams has gone on record as advocating the Free State Project in at least two columns and once on television. The Williams endorsement correlated with the largest single membership jump in the first 5000 phase of the project, a jump even higher than the results of the project being Slashdotted. He also believes in the right of states to secede from the union as was done in the U.S. in the 1860s[1] and has supported or been sympathetic toward various secessionist ideas in his writings.[2]
I'm all for that Free state idea. Get them all in one place and then put up a wall, all the way around them. Now that's a wall idea we can all get behind, for our own safety.
ReplyDeleteDarnell @ 10:35 and 10:41,
ReplyDeleteListen fool, you crack me up! Long before there were black slaves in this country, there were white slaves. Indentured servitude. Look it up. One of my ancestors came to this country in that manner, captured at the battle of Dunbar in Scotland and sold into slavery in the New World. That's real history. Do you even know what The Barnes Review is? You do hate Jews, don't you? Blacks did not fight for the south. Walter Williams is a gasbag. Blacks did not own slaves. What's your position on the holocaust?
The Barnes Review, famous purveyors of your "blacks who owned slaves" bullshit. I guess we have been visited by our first black Nazi! America truly is the land of opportunity, where even KKK membership is open to one and all!
nick said...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous:
You do seem a bit clueless at times..."
This is probably as apt a description of myself as any I could think of.
Join the club. I learn more new things here every day than I ever dispense. This is an education. More so for some of us than others.
Dorita said... I was trying to make a point -- badly -- that the evil one (pointed out in the article linked to by Hypatia) was instrumental in creating the Federal Reserve, which Greenspan -- a noted Objetivist -- held the chairmanship of for many years.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that for almost every non-NSA post that Greenwald puts up, Hypatia drops the Objectivist bomb in the comments -- or trots out long debunked urban myths.
It's standard procedure here.
Nonsense! You made your point quite well. :)
Oddly though, Carter Glass was not a "progressive" in any sense of the word, not to my thinking. I included a link to his wiki entry up thread. And, Hypatia has claimed she is not a Randian, but I do not believe half of the stuff she says anyway. EWO is the only one who still openly admits to being a member of the Cult of the Ayatollah Rand. It's my fault, really. I can only spend so much time debunking the bullshit and I just googled Damon Root and didn't even read the link Hypatia posted. Why bother when you know it's bullshit? I focus on the "quotations" from the left the right likes to use rather than their arguments. They are easier to debunk, and you get the added hit of proving them to be out and out liars. I'm batting .1000 so far. $1000 bucks, Hypatia. Just find the origin of that Orwell "quote".
spark said...
ReplyDeleteI dunno about Republicans and bigotry, but I certainly agree with this quote from John Stuart Mill -
“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”
And to this day, they claim Mill as one of their own. As long as you are dead and cannot protest the posthumous affiliation, they will claim you as part of their philosophical descension.
Just to add to the general confusion, here we have a story about the DNC campaigning AGAINST Nagin,
ReplyDeleteand another page in the story of the Democratic "culture of corruption".
Video Captures Democrat Jefferson Taking $100,000 Bribe Heh.
I was Nagin's defender early on, until he started saying things like this:
ReplyDeleteNagin's sweeping recovery plan is dependent on billions of dollars in federal aid, and in his victory speech, Nagin praised President Bush -- who like Nagin came under fire for a feeble initial response to the hurricane -- for pushing for the money.
"You and I have probably been the most vilified politicians in the country. But I want to thank you for moving that promise that you made in Jackson Square forward," Nagin said.
Uh-huh. Sure thing. Money is green. Well actually it's gold and silver but you get what I mean.
Zack writes: I think it is, and since Katrina and the immigration rallies I think that open racism has become more acceptable on the right – albeit when cloaked in “economic” or “legal” arguments – but it is still racism, and the spiteful “playground epithets” just go to prove it.
ReplyDeleteExactly. Only the willfully blind could fail to see that there is deep racism and xenophobia driving the most militant of the anti-immigrant activists. Sure, making that point bothers those who oppose generous immigration policies who are not racists, but there is nothing I can do about that -- I'm more concerned about the erupting and dangerous bigotry all around us than I am about the sensibilities of non-racists whose views converge with the racists. (And I write that as one whose general opposition to affirmative action has occasionally induced accusations of racism, and I am aware that groups like Vdare take a similar position to my own on that issue. So I do understand how frustrating it can be to confront indiscriminate and unfounded accusations of racism.)
It is simply a fact that racism and bigotry permeate the immigration "debate." See Alex Koppelman's piece here. To my utter astonishment, African-American LaShawn Barber approvingly links to Vdare and an overtly racist creature named "Fred" in support of her frenzied enthusiasm to get rid of Hispanic immigrants. Vdare sometimes traffics in interesting data, but what they do with it, the agenda to which they apply it, is repugnant beyond description. For that reason I would never give them legitimacy by approvingly linking to them for anything at all. The hatred Barber must have for immigrants, that would cause her to endorse Vdare, is breathtaking to consider.
I'm from NOLA but haven't lived there in a long time, but I know one thing - Landrieu may be white but many of the locals have an intense dislike of his father over some of his actions as mayor (i.e. desegregation) and may have put that on him. Hence Nagin may have gotten more white votes than those who vote by race think. Also, many are not exactly fans of Mary. So it isn't just about race, it is about family.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I read something - and I can't really remember where - last week, about how Republican ex-Gov Foster and his protoge Bobby Jihndal (who lost to Blanco) had set up a PAC to raise money to support Nagin in the hopes that Nagin's reelection would harm the Democratic party in NOLA permanantly. I don't know if it is true, sounds a little conspiracy-theorist to me, but wouldn't surprise me at all knowing Louisiana politics and how the GOP operates/thinks generally.
And may I just say that these national republican talking idiots commenting on NOLA and Louisiana politics is just hysterical. They don't know shit. The city/state is not like Texas, North Carolina, etc. You can't necessarily extrapolate. Choosing who to vote for all over the country, is not just about race it is about a whole host of things, and in NOLA/LA that is very much the case - just look at Huey P. Long and Edwin Edwards. Heck, Louisianians are not always the most rational voters. I mean look how successful David Duke was for God's sake!
On the other, Lakeview has a lower elevation that the Lower 9th Ward. Nobody talks about turing the white neighborhood into green space.
ReplyDeleteOK, I will. I will talk about turning the white neighborhood into green space. I will talk about correcting a multigenerational mistake: gutting wetlands to build a city below sea level in an area prone to flooding. I will talk about turning virtually all the flooded areas into green space and flood plain/wetland. I will talk about (re)building in NON floodplain areas. I will talk about rebuilding a city in such a way that it makes sense given the terrain AND is friendly to nature...so no, golf courses don't count as "green space". Wetland means wetland that supports fish, water fowl...you know, real nature.
Still though, I agree with Glenn wholeheartedly:
ReplyDeleteAll they know is that they excitedly see an opportunity where they think this sort of spiteful racial commentary -- which is normally beyond the bounds of what is acceptable -- is permissible here, and they can't pass up the chance to spew playground epithets about Ray Nagin's race and about the intellectual level of the voters who re-elected him. These ugly sentiments are never far from the surface in many people and it doesn't take much for it to come spewing forth.
Also, I read something - and I can't really remember where - last week, about how Republican ex-Gov Foster and his protoge Bobby Jihndal (who lost to Blanco) had set up a PAC to raise money to support Nagin in the hopes that Nagin's reelection would harm the Democratic party in NOLA permanantly. I don't know if it is true, sounds a little conspiracy-theorist to me, but wouldn't surprise me at all knowing Louisiana politics and how the GOP operates/thinks generally.
ReplyDeleteSounds about right. We have no idea of half the crap these bastards pull. Well, make that, we don't have the definitive proof, not yet. But whatever you can imagine, they have attempted and accomplished far worse. That's my operative assumption. Always.
Hypatia - And I write that as one whose general opposition to affirmative action has occasionally induced accusations of racism
ReplyDeleteI am in favor of affirmative action. Paris Hilton may not need our help paying for school, but definitely needs our help staying in school. We would have to lower admission standards just to get her in and accomplish retention through graduation.
And while we're speaking of racism and poverty let's not forget the folks who were on this land before us. That genocide continues.
ReplyDeleteUnemployment on the Reservation hovers around 85% and 97% live below the Federal poverty level. Adolescent suicide is 4 times the National average. Many of the families have no electricity, telephone, running water, or sewer. Many families use wood stoves to heat their homes as opposed to more modern ways to keep warm. The population on Pine Ridge has among the shortest life expectancies of any group in the Western Hemisphere: approximately 47 years for males and in the low 50s for females. The infant mortality rate is five times the United States national average.
The filthy, mangy, rabid "dog" will say that he's not responsible for what happened in the past...get over it...move on.
Well, this is NOW.
TBogg on Blogger Etiquette
ReplyDeleteA must read for EWO and Hypatia...
I love some of the comments:
It would certainly not be racist to suggest that by this time they're probably softballs, and not ping pong balls. It would be irresponsible not to speculate.
# posted by Woodrowfan : 4:53 AM
It would be irresponsible not to speculate that Malkin is a complete douchebag.
# posted by michael : 5:50 AM
Ku Klux Klan, Filapina Women's Auxillary.
# posted by LittlePig : 5:56 AM
I figured I'd better start off and tell people that the gloves were off. I didn't intend to await the perfection required of leftists, that I wasn't going to be fair to fascists and that I was going to kick them in the crotch.
So they've been warned.
# posted by olvlzl : 6:19 AM
McCain is a slimy wanker and anarcho-capitalism is on the march!
Laissez-faire that, you Frenchman!
Glenn:
ReplyDeleteThe people commenting on this municipal election have no idea why Nagin was re-elected. There are all sorts of reasons why that might have happened. Perhaps the voters thought he was not to blame for what happened with Katrina. Perhaps they thought he was heroic in how he stood up to the Federal Government and pinned the blame where it belonged. Perhaps they thought he did the best he could and was satisfied with his governance in other areas. Perhaps they had no faith in his opponent that he could do better. Those who are claiming that he was re-elected by a bunch of stupid black voters strictly on racial grounds have no idea whether that's true and they don't care either.
Nice try trying to attempting to use the race card to excuse those who reelected a racists incompetent mayor.
Like Barry, Nagin is either a racist or he is catering to racists. Can you imagine the outcry from this blog and others on the left if David Duke proclaimed that his heavily white town was going to remain Vanilla because that is what God wants.
The key difference between the Donkeys and Elephants is that the Elephants disown and attempt to run people like David Duke out of the party. In the case of Nagin, the national party remains silent about his racism and the local Donkey voters reelect this incompetent.
Meanwhile, we Elephants get to ridicule the Party of Asses for making asses of themselves once again.
Nick - re: Wallace (Dem) as bigot. Thanks for providing at least a small bit of substantive refutation. I don't think it disproves the thesis, though. Maybe it would be more accurate, due to the relatively fluid nature of the Dem/Republican labels from a historical context, to say "If bigot, then (what is currently known as)Republican/conservative/right-wing" or "if bigot, then NOT liberal/progressive".
ReplyDeleteThe Wallace era southern Dem. party machine devolved into the southern Republican party of today, didn't it?
You're correct, nobody has a monopoly on hatred, but such viewpoints do seem much more a part of the warp and weft of some political ideologies than others.
Paul Rosenberg said...
ReplyDeleteHypatia Is RIGHT, Dammit!
Okay, so she chose a foolish citation. She's a libertarian. She doesn't read widely enoughly. But she's right. And--as I've said several times before--the mean-spirited attacks on her need to stop.
The Progressives were heavily tainted with racism. So was almost everyone else at the time--with the noted exception of the socialists (for the most part) and the anarchists.
Come on, Paul, She'd be right if she wasn't Hypatia. When she says "progressives" she means "the left" and the entire left is comprised of socialists, who she will remind you were the basis of the Nazi party. Not. If she wants to stop attacks on her, she can stop launching the pre-emptive strikes as she did in this thread. Most of us here are well aware of the similarities between the populist and progressive politics of the early part of the last century. progressive politics today is a far cry from that. And she knows that but chooses to conflate the two. You don't have to participate in keeping her honest. Division of labor.
Almost everything I read here demonstrates the degree to which you morons lack anything resembling an understanding of what has happened to us in New Orleans. First of all, white neighborhoods suffered just as much damage as black neighborhoods... but white neighborhoods like Lakeview are getting much more support than black neighborhoods, like the lower nine, are getting for rebuilding. The city and the feds are openly antagoniizing the lower and middle class blacks... and RAY NAGIN is largely responsible for this. Nagin is the conservative candidate. He contributed to Bush's campaign in 2000. He was supported by the Louisiana GOP. His friends are developers who will gleefully participate in destroying black lower class neighborhoods. Nagin won because he was able to pander to racial fear and scare a majority of the city's poor blacks to vote for him.. while maintaining enough of his conservative, white base to win. His re-election is an ugly ugly thing. National conservative bloggers are being ugly in their racially tinted derision of New Orleans... but they are no worse than any other section of Americans who know absolutely nothing about New Orleans.. and don't give enough of a shit to learn.
ReplyDeleteI'm so glad you wrote this blog, I agree with you. Of course many of these people will now have an excuse for the government's lack of response to the needs that New Orleans still confronts.
ReplyDeleteI don't see how so many people can fail to see the real meaning of Nagin's "chocolate city" remarks. Maybe it was too deep in code. As a black man working in DC, the word 'gentrification' means something and I can assure you that an anti-gentrification stand will rally mid and lower income blacks.
ReplyDeleteNagin got re-elected by telling people they'd have a place in New New Orleans. I hope he makes good on it.
But Nagin is the PRO-GENTRIFICATION candidate!!! That's why "Chocolate City" was so ugly. It was a lie as well as a pander.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I realize that the language is strong... but if the Katrina experience has taught me anything it is that America does not understand New Orleans.. and is largely contemptuous of it. That tends to make me angry and shrill at times... but I don't think it's misplaced anger. America abandoned New Orleans 8 months ago. Now it is only gawking.
Paul, contrary to what you seem to agree to, none of this from that febrile anon person is true :Come on, Paul, She'd be right if she wasn't Hypatia. When she says "progressives" she means "the left" and the entire left is comprised of socialists, who she will remind you were the basis of the Nazi party.
ReplyDeleteYou cannot seriously think that fact claims are true or false depending on who proffers them. Further, I have never remotely suggested that the entire left is comprised of socialists, and never have I made any argument about their forming the basis of the Nazi party. That person promiscuously mischaracterizes my beliefs and comments.
Someone upthread had posted this:
I read somewhere that "all Republicans [Conservatives? Right-Wingers?] are not bigots, but the converse is almost certainly true - all bigots are Republicans..."
To which I accurately responded:
That very much fluctuates. [giving link to]
When Bigots Become Reformers:
The Progressive Era’s shameful record on race.
Racism has manifested in varied ideologies in the U.S. Victims of bigotry have all too often turned on other groups to despise, as my Irish-American, Democrat forebears frequently did vis-a-vis blacks.
In any event, while I appreciate that you object to people attacking me, that anon person, and his various sockpuppets, isn't part of a serious conversation. I ignore him, will continue to do so, and actually don't wish to be "defended" against his trolling and baiting.
ReplyDeleteAs I believe you have frequently mischaracterized the Democratic Party in general, and progressive Democrats in particular. Not that two wrongs make a right.
Then you believe something that is the opposite of the truth. On myriad occasions here and elsewhere I have defended Democrats, including from attacks by Ann Coulter, and have quoted from and linked to sources who demonstrate that -- far from being traitors -- presidents like Truman were actually anti-Communist, liberal Cold Warriors. I have linked to sources about Eugene McCarthy, who was not remotely a Communist, and whose left-wing political views were instead formed by a prominent theological school in the Roman Catholic Church, of which he was a devout member.
Few people are more aware than I am that Democrats have a long and honorable history of defending America. While it is true that I insist on the manifest guilt of the Stalinist spies that infested the FDR Administration, FDR did not cooperate in that. And those spies were not really Democrats; they (most of them) secretly belonged to their actual party of allegiance, the CPUSA. It is also true that I concur with the many scholars and pundits who believe that the extreme nature of much of the anti-war mvmt in the Viet Nam era became associated with George McGovern, and that this bedevils the Democrats when national security is an issue. Whether that association is fair or not, it exists.
But in prior times it was a Republican running on an anti-war ticket, e.g., Ike vis –a-vis Truman and Korea. There is nothing intrinsically anti-American about opposing a war, but the Viet Nam era skewed politics badly; for reasons I have set forth previously, opposition to the war did for too many segue into prominent support for the enemy: as a popular slogan went -- “Alienation is when your country is at war and you want the other side to win.” The side effects from all that continue.
In any event, I do not mischaracterize Democrats, and have frequently objected to those who do. But I do agree that boorish sniping such as the anon lobs pollutes discourse here. However, my view is that the only viable method of dealing with that in an unmoderated forum is to ignore such individuals.
Nagin has not "changed his spots". He has executed a politically clever move by exploiting people's fear while himself being the agent through which those fears will be realized. Nagin was well supported by the national and local GOP organizations. See here and here.Conservative whites voted against Landrieu out of racial fear because his father helped facilitate integration. Blacks largely voted for Nagin out of racial fear as well. Nagin basically cornered the market on fear and racism. Not a pretty way to win an election.
ReplyDeletePaul Rosenberg writes: Sorry, I was there, Charlie. I was the one you were demonizing, in fact.
ReplyDeleteIf I was "demonizing" you, it was not wrt your status as a Democrat. I frankly did not (do not) know whether you even consider yourself a Democrat, as many leftists are Greens, Naderites or something else. I have not ever engaged in demonizing Democrats per se. Not ever. I've done the opposite.
Really, it is one thing to criticize me for what I actually argue, but quite another to pillory me for positions I have utterly repudiated.
Popular slogan? Popular slogan?
Yes, for many, quite popular. Like it or not, and in contrast to the anti-war mvmt today, back then a sizeable contingent was actively supportive of the enemy. So few anti-war people, or leftists, today positively support Al Qaeda that even the most rancid right-wing blogs cannot find much evidence to the contrary, and it isn't as if they don't look. But that was not the case vis-a-vis the protesters of the Viet Nam war. Most, btw, who embraced the slogan: " Alienation is when your country is at war and you want the other side to win," who plastered their apt walls with pictures of Ho Chi Minh & etc., hated Democrats more than they did Republicans.
Just look at her first post in this thread, 6 down @ 8:02. Dorita has her pegged. Hypatia is a troll. A bomb throwing troll.
ReplyDeleteHypatia...Yes, for many, quite popular. Like it or not, and in contrast to the anti-war mvmt today, back then a sizeable contingent was actively supportive of the enemy. So few anti-war people, or leftists, today positively support Al Qaeda that even the most rancid right-wing blogs cannot find much evidence to the contrary, and it isn't as if they don't look.
ReplyDeleteThis woman is insane. I do not recall the incident where Ho Chi Minh killed 3000 Americans unprovoked. I do not recall the incident where Saddam Hussein did, either. Don't waste your time defending, or even conversing with, this brittle bitter old puke.
"It was patriotism, not communism, that inspired me."
ReplyDeleteHo Chi Minh
LOL, what a deliberately obtuse hypocrite you are Glen.
ReplyDeleteI say this because you are too smart and well informed to be ignorant of all the racial epithets, racist cartoons, and racist commentary directed and officially coordinated by the democratic party against african american republicans. African Americans like Steele in Maryland, Condi Rice, and Clarence Thomas are hurled at these individuals and others with far more vitriol and racist intent than anything you've cited in your pitiful race baiting post.
When it comes to outright official racism nothing holds a candle to the democrats going after a black republican, and you, Glen, know that.
UPDATE:
White democrats at the top of the DNC, including Howard "the scream" Dean, worked behind the scenes to DEFEAT Nagin in favor of the White Male party favorite Mitch Landrieu. Nagin gives post election victory press conference extolling the virtues of President Bush for doing what he promissed he would to help the blacks of New Orleans.
Oops.. LMAO
Laughs & Howls the "Dog"
In all the coverage of Nagin's "Chocolate City" comment, I've never once heard a single person point out that it's a reference to a Parliment Funkadelic song. Parliment coined the phrase in reference to D.C. back in the '70s. I don't know why Nagin didn't mention this himself--he certainly dug his hole deeper with his chocolate and milk explanation. Nagin surely knew that while many in the largely African-American population of New Orleans would embrace the reference, the mainstream and conservative media would never make the connection to the Parliment song.
ReplyDelete