Glenn Beck; President Obama Is Sympathetic To (Terrorists) Cause

Glenn Beck

Normally, I tend to avoid writing much about Glenn Beck because I see him as one of two things: a con man using racial politics and nutty extremism to get an audience of crazies or a freak.

I suppose he could be a little of both.

Anyway, here is the latest craziness coming from Beck that I found particularly disturbing even by his pitiful standards of human decency.

From Media Matters for America:

GLENN BECK: The Japanese government has no plans to expand the 12 mile evacuation zone. Meanwhile, we’re loading up all of the diplomats from the State Department and getting out of there. Also something that I’m going to do tonight, I’m going to give the speech that the President should give in the Oval Office that he hasn’t, and I don’t know why. Our donations are way, way down for Japan. I don’t see Hollywood mobilizing. So, we will. The speech from my Oval Office, tonight. It’s amazing what’s going on, and I don’t really understand why yet I haven’t figured it out yet.

There’s another story that is very disturbing. And this just came in, it’s an alert from the Wall Street Journal. The Obama Administration is seeking an United Nations security resolution that would authorize a wide range of possible military strikes against the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. It is aimed at preventing them from overrunning the rebels and civilians in the country’s east. In discussions with other Security Council members, the Obama administration is making the case that a no-fly zone is not enough. It would be insufficient to save the rebel capital in Eastern Libya. So the U.S. is seeking a broad UN authorization for strikes aimed at holding back Libyan ground and air forces with the aim of protecting the rebel capital and avoiding a humanitarian crisis there. Military operations could include a no-fly zone but wouldn’t be limited to that.

Holy cow. What does this mean? You know we’ve been saying that – where is the President on Libya? Tonight, I lay out the case, and it’s not a smoking gun, and it’s not an open and shut case, but it is something that I haven’t found the right people yet, or the right evidence to link it all together, but I can feel it, that there’s something wrong with this Libyan thing. We were talking about it this morning, Pat. That the time to have a no-fly zone is not now.

PAT GRAY: Yeah, right at the beginning. Right at the beginning. Seriously, I mean, it’s progressed way too far just to do a no-fly zone.

BECK: Now it’s going to be a civil war. Now, now, this would be – think of this America, this would be the third country that America has ground forces or air forces or sea, that is in battle and engaged in a Muslim country. That’s insanity.

GRAY: Mmhmm.

BECK: And the time to support the rebels was at the very beginning when the momentum was there. There’s no momentum now. The momentum is the other way. I’m not saying we don’t do something to protect these people, but I’ll tell you, it’s very disturbing to me that our military could be engaged in yet another war in the Middle East.

GRAY: I think if you would have done this at the beginning, you would have been far less likely to have any kind of confrontation. You remember 1989 when we had that little run-in with the MiGs, the Libyan MiGs? And our -

BECK: – our guys

GRAY: Our F-14 tomcats took ‘em down.

BECK: Yeah.

GRAY: And there was not a peep out of Libya for the next 20 years. Libya didn’t make a sound. Well -

BECK: Yeah. [unintelligible]

GRAY: I mean, they had the couple terrorist activities. But, for the most part, Moammar Gadhafi was pretty quiet after that point.

BECK: Oh yeah. We were bombing his tent.

GRAY: Yeah.

BECK: There’s no – there’s, I mean, now, this is the problem with this president, it’s the same thing. Look at his pattern, the BP oil spill. This is the thing that bothers me. And it’s always patterns. The BP oil spill – we all know he used that to his advantage – never let a good crisis go to waste. And so what did he do? He wasn’t there – he was engaged, of course he talked about it, but he wasn’t engaged. Until it started getting out of control, and all of us were saying, where is the government?

GRAY: Mmhmm.

BECK: Where is the president on this? And he was strangely absent.

GRAY: Hasn’t it been like that with every crisis -

BECK: Everything. Every crisis.

GRAY: The Fort Hood – the Fort Hood shooting. He wasn’t really out front with that, and that was, you know, 13 U.S. soldiers being killed on their base. And then when he finally did make the statement, he comes out and talks about the – the Indian medicine man first -

BECK: Right. OK.

GRAY: – for two minutes before he even got around to the mention.

BECK: But here is – here is the point on that. I believe that’s because he just sees us as the oppressor nation. He just sees us as a nation who is and has oppressed the Native Americans and, and the Muslim communities around the world. And so he’s – he’s – he’s not with the terrorists, I’m not saying that, but he is sympathetic to their cause, which slows people down. You know what I mean?

GRAY: Mm.

BECK: You agree with that or disagree with that?

GRAY: Well, I don’t know if sympathetic to the cause is the right -

BECK: Sym -

GRAY: – phrase.

BECK: Sym – oh, uh – wait a minute, I’m not saying that he’s sympathetic with people blowing people up.

GRAY: Yeah.

BECK: I’m saying -

GRAY: I just wanted to make sure -

BECK: Yeah, yeah.

GRAY: – that people know that you’re not saying that.

BECK: He’s sympathetic, he’s sympathetic [unintelligible]

GRAY: Well I think he sympathizes that America has done some bad things -

BECK: Yeah.

GRAY: And, and so – [unintelligible]

BECK: The Palestinian plight.

GRAY: Yes.

BECK: The Palestinian plight – only like 23 percent of Americans agree with the Palestinians. But he is, I believe, he’s probably one of the 23 percent.

GRAY: Well, his pastor said it best, didn’t he, when he said America’s chickens have come home to roost.

BECK: Yes.

GRAY: Maybe he has a little of that sentiment -

BECK: Yes.

GRAY: – I don’t know.

BECK: Yes, yes. I’m not saying that he’s in league with the terrorists, I’m not saying that he agrees with bombings like that. But he is slower to react because he is a guy who is sympathetic to something that most Americans are not. We don’t – he has said it himself over and over, I’m tired of Muslim-Americans being rounded up in the middle of the night. That’s never happened. And if it has, show it to me, Mr. President because I will be with you on that. I agree with you that that shouldn’t happen. So show me the evidence, and I will stand with you.

But what’s disturbing about the BP oil crisis is it worked to his favor, it worked to his advantage by leaving it go for a while and not capping it, he had to have a massive disaster to be able to do what he did. Now is this what’s happening in Libya? Because the time for that, I mean, even France is leading this. Nobody, is – and the people are crying out, America. And everybody knows we’re the only one that can do it. We have the carriers right there. I’ve been on the aircraft carriers in the fifth fleet – 90 miles off the coast of Libya. We have them. We can do it. But the time to do it was when we had momentum and now, what’re we gonna – we have more troops going someplace? The possibility of it? We’re going to engage people with our military? What’re – what – we’re going to get involved in another war? What are you, out of your mind? It doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t make sense.

And here’s the other thing that I just want to share with those who think that the workers of the world can unite. What is happening in the world right now is exactly what happened in the 1920s and early 1930s in Europe, and it is the communists, and the socialists, and the Marxists that believe in one global order, and they believe that if the workers will unite – I mean, the people who took out the permit for the unions for the American Dream Act in Washington D.C., they say it clearly on their own website, the International Socialist Organization, that they believe that only the workers uniting will actually cause the revolution to happen.

Well here’s where they go wrong. If you look at what’s happening in Japan right now and you look at the spike of the yen, that is because people love their country and they are selling their stuff, and they are getting out of gold or whatever it is, and they are buying their own dollar, their yen, and they are going to invest it in their own country. When the whole world melts down, when America begins to fall on real hard times – and I mean, I – I hope I’m discredited on this, but I believe it’s coming. And when we fall on real hard times, they will say workers of the world unite, and they will unite all of the workers, but at some point the unions – the union workers will say, wait a minute, how are you going to balance the world, you’re giving our jobs to India, or Mexico, or whatever. And people become nationalists, that’s what’s happening in Japan. There’s no – I’m not saying it’s communist or anything else, I’m just talking about the yen – they’re becoming nationalists. We did it after 9/11. We protect our own countries.

And that’s what the Soviet Union, that’s where Lenin and Marx and Stalin all went wrong – is they think they can unite the whole world with the workers. But the first step where it starts to go wrong is people start to protect themselves and their own communities that they understand as communities. And the world does not accept this global order, it doesn’t, and when things get better in India or jobs go to India instead of here, they will not listen to a socialist saying, “workers of the world, unite” what they will listen to is a national socialist, somebody who says take care of America first, workers, you’re already unionized, you’re already together right? It’s them that is the problem, and they become national socialists, not international socialists. International socialism will not work, and it will turn the world to national socialism, which is the Nazi regime.

I don’t know how people don’t understand the logic of this, but it is true, and it happens the same way every time, and governments, and they, the, governments, or the people, that the radicals, they use the youth – which is happening, and they also use giant corporations. And they get giant corporations, some of them willingly, and some of them just acquiesce because they say, I’ll just get, ’cause they’ll let me survive, and I’ll be part of the survivors. You do not want to be part of those survivors, because in the end, they do not survive, because they always end the same way, always. Whether it’s Mao, Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini, they always end the same way.

Beck, no one knows what you mean because you’re a freak.

One expects insane rants from Beck, but some of the stuff in here, with regards to terrorism and President Obama is disgraceful.

Michael Steele Gets In Trouble And Looks For Black Up

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, better known as “Money Mike,” is in hot water these days.

Money Mike had us fooled. See, we all thought that Mike had turned in his so-called race card when he took over the RNC and became a full-fledged Republican. But, Mike has come to realize that his so-called race card was pretty valuable and decided he had not quite maxed it out as of yet. So, after using the media to whine about left-wing blacks playing the so-called race card, Money Mike has decided that maybe it is time for him to swipe his get-out-of-trouble-using-race-card again … for old times sake.

On ABC’s GMA, Steele said that he was being singled out in GOP politics because he’s black. He’s calling Republicans racists. Wow, he’s joining us except in a much deeper way because I’ve been calling many in the Tea Party movement racist. In his case….

He’s indicting the whole Republican party:

The embattled chairman played the race card today when asked on “Good Morning America” if he has a slimmer margin of error because he is African American.

“The honest answer is, ‘yes,’” he said. “Barack Obama has a slimmer margin. A lot of folks do. It’s a different role for me to play and others to play and that’s just the reality of it. But you take that as part of the nature of it.”

“My view on politics is much more grassroots oriented, it’s not old boy network oriented, so I tend to, you know, come at it a little bit stronger, a little bit more street-wise, if you will. That’s rubbed some feathers the wrong way,” Steele told “GMA’s” George Stephanopoulos.

Mike, Mike, Mike…

The oftentimes bumbling Steele just doesn’t get it. Note to Brother Mike: You can’t play the so-called race card if you’re a Republican. Mike, right wingers don’t mind MasterCard, American Express, Visa or even UNO cards, but the race one is the card they don’t like.

By the way, Mike is no rookie at playing the race card.

Nothing like trouble to help Money Mike remember that he is black and find something in common with President Obama (this should illustrate how much heat Steele is feeling).

Here is what White House press secretary Robert Gibbs had to say: as quoted by The Hill:

GOP Chairman Michael Steele shouldn’t blame criticism of his actions on race, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday. Gibbs called Steele’s remark that criticism of his leadership is motivated by race “silly” during a meeting with reporters. “I think Michael Steele’s problem isn’t the race card, it’s the credit card,” Gibbs added.

Harris Poll Shows Just How Nutty Those On The Far Right Are With President Obama

A still fairly recent release of a Harris poll that put into sharp focus how ignorant some Republicans are when it comes to their views on President Barack Obama. Some of the revelations in the poll show the depth of the hatred that some close-minded Republicans have for this president. And, that hatred started long before he was president and long before he became the official nominee for the presidency in 2008. The hatred started before this nation knew much of anything about Barack Obama.

The findings of the Harris poll continue to reflect the hatred that exists in the dark hearts of some of these Republicans. Below are summaries of the Harris poll results as compiled by Media Matters for America.

According to the Harris poll, conducted of 2,320 adults between March 1 and March 8, a majority of Republicans believe President Obama:

• is a socialist (67 percent);
• wants to take away Americans’ right to own guns (61 percent);
• is Muslim (57 percent);
• wants to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to a one-world government (51 percent); and
• has done many things that are unconstitutional (51 percent).

It goes on:

• large minorities also believe Obama was not born in the United States and is therefore ineligible for the presidency (45 percent);
• many believe he is a racist (42 percent);
• and many believe he is doing many things Hitler did (38 percent)

There is your Republican party (still believing in thoroughly vetted and debunked garbage. It basically shows that everyday Republicans and tea baggers are like storm troopers from the Star Wars movies. They operate like robots taking their marching orders from right-wing extremists like Roger Ailes, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity.

Rep. Lewis, Rep. Cleaver Attacked By People For Being Called ‘Nigger’ And Being Spit On

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths that some conservative black people will go to protect racism at Tea Party rallies while attacking black leaders for being called “nigger” or being spit on by protesters.

That thought brings me to comments I read from conservative blogger Andre Harper, who proudly talks about himself as a black man who was at Tea Party rallies. Hey, that is fine by me. If he wants to hang with those individuals then that is no doubt his choice. If he chooses to ignore the racist language at many of these rallies, if he chooses to ignore that these Tea Party people were silent (nonexistent) prior to the election of Barack Obama as the first black president of the United States of America, then that is his choice. Again, where were these Tea Party people worried about big government, government spending, the loss of freedoms and all of this other stuff when George W. Bush was president? They were silent. But, we elect the first black president and all of a sudden these good and patriotic Americans are soooooooooo worried about freedom, government spending, deficits, the size of government, etc. It’s all a bunch of bullsh!t. To each their own.

But, it still saddens me when racism apologists/excuse makers you see people make comments like the following (from Harper’s blog):

Democrat puppets like representatives [Emanuel] Cleaver and John Lewis are nothing but frauds. They instinctively play the race card because that is how they have achieved their lot in life. No one should be surprised that they can’t prove these accusations. They never can. With all these videos surfacing, the large police presence and all the witnesses, I find it hard to believe that no one can identify or find any evidence of their claims. It’s disgraceful and completely unfounded for John Lewis to compare this peaceful protest to his experience on the Pettis Bridge. The situations and conditions are completely different. The truth is these cowards are always going to play the race card because they are weak-minded, cowardly individuals that exploit race by instinct.

The words are nothing short of disgraceful and ridiculous. Oh, and it’s the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

Rep. John Lewis is a man who fought and bled for civil rights to allow men like Harper and myself to be able to blog with the kinds of freedoms black people of prior generations could not have imagined when they were young. Sadly, Harper uses his platform as a blogger to refer to John Lewis (and Emanuel Cleaver, who had a Tea Party person spit on him) as “Democrat puppets.”

Once again, we see the lengths that people will go to apologize for or make excuses for racism at Tea Party (that includes Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele).

Check out the full version of Harper’s irrational and racism-apologizing-for blog: http://andreharper.blogspot.com/2010/03/extreme-lie-conservatism-vs-liberalism.html

Fox News, Bret Baier Show Complete Lack Of Respect For President Obama

As many of you know, I have no use for Fox News. Frankly, I see Fox News (and virtually every on air personality that comprises the network) as little more than a communications arm of the Republican Party.

So, based on that, I was a bit surprised that President Obama would take time out of his schedule (with so many important issues on the table) and waste it talking to a representative of a channel that is doing essentially everything within its power to undermine his presidency. 24/7, Fox News personalities take turns taking shots at President Obama, attacking him, attacking his administration, and attacking any and all policies even remotely affiliated with him. So, as President Obama went on the air with Fox News anchor Bret Baier, I knew he was in enemy territory with a man who was predisposed to doing everything in his power to making the president look bad.

Ultimately, Baier miserably failed (in my opinion) to make the president look bad. Actually, Baier came across as a man who had an agenda (one to attack the president relentlessly and disrespectfully challenge him repeatedly). What made the failure of Baier almost a certainty was his ignorance to fall into the same trap that so many right wingers fall into: he underestimated the intelligence and toughness of the president. Several times now, President Obama has challenged the Republicans on their own turf and beaten them like a bowl of eggs. Still, in the back of his mind, I can imagine Baier believing that President Obama was not that spot and probably chanting “teleprompter, teleprompter, teleprompter” in his head (thinking he had the president’s number with no teleprompter … and that the president’s act was little more than smoke and mirrors).

Like so many others, Baier ended up looking foolish and (perhaps worst) came across as an angry, disrespectful and frustrated partisan.

This is from a Washington Post blog written by Jonathan Capehart:

Watching the entire interview made me miss the late moderator of “Meet The Press,” Tim Russert. He would have asked process questions. He would have pushed the president to answer questions he didn’t feel were being answered. But he would have done so in a manner that was firm, yet respectful. More importantly, he would have focused intensely on the substance of the health-care legislation to cut through the clutter, rhetoric and political posturing so that viewers at home would have as much information as possible before their representatives voted.

Baier was less interested in substance (if he was at all) and more interested in trying to portray the president as working some sort of unsavory backdoor deals to pass this health care legislation that conservatives and Fox News (one in the same) abhor.

Baier showed a stunning and complete lack of respect for President Obama and his presidency. I was shocked at the depth, breadth and boldness of his disrespect of President Obama.

Repeatedly, Baier cut off the president when he didn’t like his answers, and came out with right-wing talking point after right-wing talking point to try and paint President Obama as negatively as he possibly could. It’s fairly clear that Baier was in full partisan Fox News mode as he tried to talk over the president and interrupt as Barack Obama attempted to answer his questions. Much like a sports announcer for the flagship station, Baier was playing to his far-right audience by trying to rough up the president with clearly disrespectful intentions. To a large extent, Bret Baier was playing to his right-wing audience.

Here is a line from a column written by Boyce Watkins that caught my attention:

The right wing doesn’t hate Obama just because he’s black. They hate him because he’s an “uppity negro” who doesn’t agree with them. This story was predictable long before it ever took place.

I think Dr. Boyce is right on the money. Many conservatives see President Obama as overstepping his bounds and being out of his place in society.

Bret Baier’s actions, during this Fox News interview, were a sign of how a lot of conservatives feel about President Obama, and it is not just because of his politics.

He was speaking for millions of individuals on the far right who have no respect for this president and have nothing but contempt for his presidency.

Fox News Boycott:
http://foxnewsboycott.com/fox-news/bret-baier-interrupts-president-obama-16-times/

UPDATE: Watch the difference between how Baier practically gets on his knees sucks off President George W. Bush while practically spitting on President Obama. This is from Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/18/baier-bush-obama/

When It Comes To Money Mike And The Republicans … They Are Who We Thought They Were

“They are who we thought they were,” is a quote made famous (maybe infamous) by former Arizona Cardinals head coach Dennis Green during an explosive press conference years back.

But, when you think of Michael “Money Mike” Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, the quote sadly rings all too true. Regretfully, Steele has become a phony face of diversity for a party all too comfortably willing to engage in the most hateful brand of politics now that we have a black man, Barack Obama, as president of the United States.

From the New York Daily News:

A secret GOP fundraising document urges the party to fill its coffers by playing on donors’ “fear” of Barack Obama and a pledge to “save the country from trending towards socialism,” Politico.com reports, complete with an image depicting Barack Obama as the Joker.

The strategy was presented by the RNC’s Finance Director, Rob Bickhart, and Finance Chairman, Peter Terpelk, to fundraisers at a GOP retreat in Florida, the Web site reports.

Included in the Power Point presentation is a slide titled ‘The Evil Empire’ depicting Sen. Harry Reid as Scooby Doo and Nancy Pelosi as Cruella DeVille, along with the Joker caricature of Obama.

No amount of pathetic excuse making (saying the offensive images had been on the Web, throwing a staffer under the bus, saying it was just for a small group, it was supposed to be humorous, turning himself into the victim) on the part of Money Mike is going to erase the fact that the Republicans’ game plan is to use the politics of fear and division to achieve what they deem to be “success” in future campaigns.

Steele says they will not tolerate this, but only time will tell if he is being a windbag trying to perform damage control.

In the video, he starts whining and trying to shift the debate back to health care and then turning himself to the victim over and over again.

Steele looks pathetic and like a clown defending this garbage.

Instead of answers, all Steele had to offer were excuses, issue shifting and victimization.

Democrats don’t want to get caught not looking and blindsided by the trash people apparently affiliated with the RNC are putting out.

The last thing Democrats want is to feel like Dennis Green did in the video below:

Can’t let them off the hook.

Aw, Lloyd Have Mercy … Right-Winger Attacks NAACP Over Image Awards, Van Jones

Van Jones

Black far-right commentator Lloyd Marcus is back at it trying to score points with conservatives (including Tea Party extremists) through his latest attack on something representing black people.

The saddest part of Marcus’s attack (an opinion piece titled “NAACP Image Award Reaches New Low”) is that he strangely attempts to use Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as a weapon to take shots at the NAACP, organization president Benjamin Todd Jealous and NAACP Image Award recipient Van Jones, the victim of a vicious smear campaign led by right-wing extremist Glenn Beck and other on-air personalities at Fox News and on the radio airwaves.

Here is a portion of what Marcus wrote in his attempt to smear the NAACP and take another shot at Jones:

Dr. King’s once-great NAACP has become a negative, shameful tool of the left: overseers committed to keeping their fellow blacks dependent and subservient to the Democrat party. Including once-self-proclaimed Communist Van Jones [pictured] among the honorees at this year’s NAACP Image Award show last night epitomizes the organization’s descent into liberal Hades. Jones was forced to resign as the Obama administration’s green czar due to his radical, far-left ideas, which include believing the Bush administration blew up the towers on 9/11. Jones has spouted extremely vicious and vulgar comments about political opponents. NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous called Jones ‘an American treasure.’ Is Jones the ‘image’ that the NAACP wishes to present to young black America while treating black U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and black former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice like dirt? Utterly outrageous and shameful.

I am not sure I totally get the connection Marcus is attempting to draw to link the NAACP to Dr. King. That doesn’t seem to make sense to me. I don’t know that Dr. King really had a particularly strong affiliation or relationship with the NAACP. Contrary to popular belief, not all activists during the Civil Rights Era were directly involved with the NAACP.

Marcus’s column sounds like more right-wing hate targeted at Van Jones, a man conservatives have tried to portray as an extremist, as a communist and as someone who is anti-American (primarily to attack President Barack Obama through his association with Jones).

Right wingers are upset because Jones called Republicans “assholes” at some point in his life. To those who are upset about it, I say, “quit crying.”

Come up with your own awards if you don’t like the ones the NAACP Image Awards are handing out.

As for the comments about former U.S.  Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, I see a split decision. I don’t have a huge problem with Rice (I probably do not agree with her on a whole lot in terms of politics, and that is OK), but Thomas is a completely different story. Sorry, but there is not a whole lot of love over here for Justice Thomas.

As for Jones linking Bush to 9/11, that is disputed. Here is Jones, account of the controversial issue.

Whether people like Lloyd Marcus like it or not, people are not going to throw a talented and bright man like Van Jones under the bus.

I applaud the NAACP for recognizing a man who has given a lot to this country and has much more to give in the years to come.

UPDATE ON VAN JONES: Jones also holds a joint appointment at Princeton University, as a distinguished visiting fellow in both the Center for African American Studies and in the Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.

Rush Limbaugh Takes Another Opportunity To Attack Black People

Far-right extremist Rush Limbaugh is taking another shot at black people and attacking them for what he sees as “black dialect” as far as the way he hears blacks.

LIMBAUGH: Did you catch — you catch that, sir? What did you — did you catch that? No, you missed it, you missed it. See, you’re listening to the substance here, you missed it this. Play it again, Mike.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: This is what Harry Reid was talking about. Obama can turn on that black dialect when he wants to and turn it off. The president of the United States just said here as a condition of receiving — and I wonder if this was on the teleprompter. Did somebody put this on the prompter? As a condition of receiving access to Title I funds, we will ax all states. Who’s he trying to reach out here to? The Reverend Jackson? The Obama criticizer? Who’s he — who’s he — now, if I used the word “ax” the rest of the day, am I going to get beat up and creamed for making fun of this clean, crisp, calm, cool, new, articulate president? Maybe we should do it and see what happens. I’ll ax my advisers, and I might even ax Governor Coomo [Cuomo], as the Reverend Jackson pronounced his name.

As we have seen over the years, Limbaugh rarely misses an opportunity to take shots at black people and to try and portray them as second-class citizens and as inferior.

And, as always, his supporters (who in privacy chuckle at such shots at black people) follow him and make excuses for his bigotry.

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/limbaughwire/2010/02/22#0039

The Politics Of Personal Destruction Again Target President Obama

It’s an old saying these days, but once again the “politics of personal destruction” are back and the target this time is President Obama. Blogger Sandra Rose has an entry that discusses someone purported to be a college acquaintance (John C. Drew) of President Obama. Drew spots off the same old stuff we’ve heard people use to attack President Obama: Marxist, America as the enemy, yadda, yadda, yadda. There are also YouTube video clips from “Breitbart.tv” to further illustrate the FAR-right agenda at play here.

Here is an excerpt from Rose’s blog:

According to Drew, in 1980 Obama saw America as “the enemy” and he predicted a future where the people would “rise up” and “overthrow the government.”

A CNN poll out today shows that the majority of voters don’t think Obama will be reelected to a 2nd term.

An argument could be made that Obama was a young, impressionable, idealistic college student in 1980. But the facts prove that Obama still embodies the same communist/Marxist ideals that he was so passionate about in his college days.

Couple that with the fact that Obama refuses to release his college transcripts from Occidental which, some say, proves his participation in Marxist groups on campus.

Same old stuff: Marxist, socialist, communist …

What are the “facts” that will show us he “still embodies the same communist/Marxist ideals that he was so passionate about in his college days” for the people to see?

Just because people advance a smear over and over again (with either minimal evidence or no evidence to support it) does not make it true.

Misguided Republican Wrong About President Obama’s Polling Woes

Republicans believe some of President Obama’s political woes are essentially because he is this radical, socialist and far left politician unwilling to work with the GOP.

Consider this blog entry (I am not necessarily saying this writer is asserting the above):

Ouch! The Hill is reporting that a CNN poll shows that 52% of Americans say Obama does NOT deserve a second term. Only 44% say they would vote for him again. This is true for both all Americans and registered voters.

Fifty two percent is almost the number that voted for all that Hopey Changey nonsense in the first place. Obama’s does have some “hope”. He can either move to the center on his own improving his reelection chances or he can be saddled with a Republican controlled Congress that will make the move for him. Other than that, Obama is looking very much like Jimmy Carter 2.0.

The “Hopey Changey” thing is cute, but overall this is misguided thinking.

I know our Republican friends want to reach back for Jimmy Carter comparisons, but they would be quite foolish to do so for a couple of reasons: Frankly, many of today’s voters probably know painfully little about President Carter other than perhaps understanding he is a former president . They would be grossly underestimating President Obama.

It also is misguided because President Obama’s struggles actually are due to the fact that he has moved too far to the right in an effort to reach out to Republicans who have become and will remain (as long as Obama is in the White House) the party of “NO.”

Progressives that believed we would pull out of the deadly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, restore the worldwide respect of the U.S., rebuild coalitions with our allies around the world, lead the effort to rebuild the economy and push through domestic expected policies have become uneasy.

When President Obama reaches out to the people who elected him his numbers will go back up. They’re waiting.

Limbaugh Again Uses “Uppity” Code Word To Imply President Obama Is Out Of Line

Conservative leader Rush Limbaugh is at it again accusing President Obama of being “uppity” in the way he carries himself. As I’ve written before, the term uppity is a code word that several far-right (and prominent) conservatives have been using to attack this president. It’s a way of describing a black man who has overstepped his bounds and gotten out of line with a white man or white men who are perceived to know more than him, be in a higher social position or be flat-out better. It’s a term from a long-past era that many far-right conservatives, like Limbaugh, would love to see make a comeback.

Face it: “Uppity” is a term that has race written all over it and that is why Rush Limbaugh continues to come back to that term. Among Limbaugh’s goals are to agitate, degrade, inflame racial tension and create conflict.

This is from Media Matters for America:

LIMBAUGH: From InsideHigherEducation.com, you will not believe — well yeah, you will believe it. Everything that used to be unbelievable is not only believable it is happening. “Barack Obama has been called a lot of things since he hit the national stage: Celebrity, elitist and even one who ‘pals around with terrorists.’ But as his poll numbers come back down to earth, and an emboldened conservative movement sharpens its attacks, the label that seems to be sticking to Obama as much as any lately is that of ‘professor.’ Speaking to Tea Party activists in Nashville last week, Sarah Palin did her part to keep the ‘professor’ dig in circulation. The 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee told a frenzied crowd, ‘They know we’re at war, and to win that war we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern.’ The use of ‘professor’ as a term of derision may have hit its stride in the 1950s, but it dates back to scolding characterizations of Socrates, according to Geoffrey Nunberg, a linguistics professor at the University of California at Berkeley.”

OK, fine. Frankly, I didn’t know that “professor” had become the number one dig. But if it is, fine and dandy. Now get this: “Charles Ogletree, Harvard law professor, founding and executive director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for race and Justice says that he sees the ‘professor’ label as a thinly veiled attack on Obama’s race.”

Yes, my friends, you heard me read that. I heard myself read it. So now when we call Obama a professor, we are racist. “Calling Obama the professor walks dangerously close to labeling him uppity, a term with racial overtones that has surfaced in the political arena before, Ogletree said. Describing his divisive confirmation hearings as a circus, Justice Thomas called the proceedings a high tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deigned to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas. It’s perhaps ironic, then, that the Ogletree, who represented Anita Hill, now sees a bit of the ‘uppity’ label being placed on Obama.”

This is two different kinds of uppity that are being discussed about here. So now is professor the P-word? We’ve got the N-word, we have the R-word, and now we have the P-word? We can’t — we gotta — we gotta speak in code? And only people who don’t know what P-word is will understand what we’re saying.

“The idea that he’s not one of us, Ogletree says of the professor label. He has these ideas on that are left-wing that are socialist, that he’s palling around with terrorists. Those are buzzwords, but the reality was that they were looking at this president as an African-American who is out of place.” You know, Professor Ogletree, I hate to burst the balloon, but the single most important reason Obama was elected was his race.

A bunch of white people who thought electing a black president would assuage all of their guilt and erase our racial past voted for Obama. They couldn’t of cared less what he thought, what he said. He didn’t think of his as uppity, they were being selfish. They didn’t like feeling guilty over our racists past, slavery, and so they thought pulling the lever for Obama would absolve them. It wasn’t for his policies, as we are now quickly learning.

What Clarence Thomas meant by uppity, meaning he wasn’t a liberal black. When Clarence Thomas said uppity black thinks for himself means he’s off the reservation, so to speak. He’s not following the civil rights speech codes set forth by the Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton and whoever else is in charge of them. But nobody — Obama is uppity, but not as a black. He is an elitist. He does think he’s smarter and better than everybody else. That’s what he was taught. He’s a Harvard man.

The fact that he needed to qualify his use of the word uppity by saying “not as a black” shows he had a full understanding of the racially-inflammatory nature of his words. He is playing into the undercurrent of racism he hopes is continuing to flow in this country to use it as a method of attacking President Obama.

Limbaugh then loses credibility stripes for quoting Clarence Thomas in regard to civil rights.

He also essentially calls white people (I am assuming liberal white people) stupid for voting for voting for a black man to be president of the United States of America.

While most people see a man who rose from humble roots to do great things, it’s clear Rush Limbaugh has an issue with what he sees as an uppity Negro in the White House.

It’s also clear that when most black people accomplish something in life he sees it as being the product of affirmative action (or white guilt) while when white people accomplish something it’s because they worked hard.

Tim Wise Speaks On White Privilege And Racism Directed At President Obama

Republicans Smacked Down By President Obama

I think the stunning arrogance of the Republicans, who have been reading their own talking points far too much, came back to bite them in the ass in Baltimore last week. The Republicans welcomed President Obama to their annual retreat last week in Baltimore (maybe with the thought they could make him look bad on national television). It was a big mistake. One has to imagine the Republicans never knew what hit them by the time everything was said, done and written (unless you watch Fox News which still tried to spin it negatively for the president). President Obama went onto Republican turf, handled all the partisan attacks, misleading information, fear mongering and falsehoods with dignity, class and intelligence.

With relative ease, the president smacked down most, if not all, of the Republican falsehoods and misleading attacks with charm, poise and intelligence. In all honesty, President Obama made the Republicans looked like a bunch of angry obstructionists using fear, misleading information, false information and hatred as weapons of attack. The president came off looking like a good guy trying to do the right thing while the Republicans came off looking angry and politically hateful.

This is from Think Progress:

House Republicans were fired up and ready to go for their conversation with President Obama at their annual retreat today. According to the New York Times, members of the conservative Republican House Conference said they were “itching to quiz the president and present their policy ideas rather than listen to another lofty presidential address.” Although such sessions generally occur behind closed doors, Republicans agreed to open it up after the White House said it was willing to do so. However, after Obama’s strong performance, some Republicans are now regretting that decision. As Luke Russert reported on MSNBC:

RUSSERT: Tom Cole — former head of the NRCC, congressman from Oklahoma — said, “He scored many points. He did really well.” Barack Obama, for an hour and a half, was able to refute every single Republican talking point used against him on the major issues of the day. In essence, it was almost like a debate where he was front and center for the majority of it. … One Republican said to me, off the record, behind closed doors: “It was a mistake that we allowed the cameras to roll like that. We should not have done that.”

Here is the bottom line: The Republicans believed all of that garbage about teleprompters and questioned the president’s intelligence. They underestimated him (mainly his intelligence) and ended up looking REALLY bad as  he handled all of their questions and attacks as if he knew what they were going to say (because he did know what they were going to say).

President Obama was right about how vulnerable these Republicans become with their own base because of how hateful the rhetoric from the far right has become. He turned on the charm and used reason to expose the anger of the far right in attacking his administration. As the president asked how can the far right work with the president when they’re buying into (initiating or advancing) the garbage that he is a fascist, a socialist, he’s trying to harm old people, he is trying to take over government and so on and so forth? They can’t unless they are willing to risk the wrath of people who hated Barack Obama from the moment they first saw him.

But, back to my main point: Republicans made a mistake.

They underestimated Barack Obama and he made them look really bad on a national stage (unless you watch Fox News in which case you would not have seen the entire exchange as they turned away to begin bashing him with right-wing talking points … disguised as fair and balanced).

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/29/russert-gop-obama/
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/29/obama-gop-retreat/

President Obama Talked About Jobs Lost During The Last Two Years

Here is an interesting little nugget, at Booker Rising, I found from a conservative writer attacking President Obama’s State of the Union speech:

Quentin Banks, a conservative in St. Louis, Mo.: “Did he mention the 4 1/2 million jobs lost under his administration in the last year? He didn’t? Surprise, surprise.”

Here is an excerpt from President Obama’s State of the Union address on Jan. 27:

But the truth is, these steps won’t make up for the seven million jobs that we’ve lost over the last two years. The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth, and finally address the problems that America’s families have confronted for years.

Since he mentioned the last two years I think the last year fits into that timeframe.

More Irrational Reaction From President Obama’s State Of The Union

President Obama’s State of the Union address really stirred something in those on the far right.

Here is another example from the blog Booker Rising:

Paige Perkins, a conservative Republican, writes on Facebook: “Obama’s SoTU Checklist: Blame Republicans, Blame Republicans, Blame Bush, Encourage bi-partisanship, Declare it’s not my fault, Pat myself on the back, Deliver bad news, Repeat as necessary.”

This is an anger point for many conservatives.

Paige missed the part where President Obama talked about what his administration has added to the deficit. Pointing out the facts (about the state of the economy when President Obama took office) is not blaming.

In baseball, just because a relief pitcher comes in does not mean he assumes responsibility for the runners on base. The starting pitcher bears some responsibility.

Apparently Serving The Government Is Not As Noble To At Least One Conservative

It used to be considered noble to serve the public or to serve the government in some way, but apparently those days are gone in the eyes of some conservatives.

Here is a comment from the blog Booker Rising:

Jennifer Burke, a conservative in Washington, writes on Facebook: “And there it is…..let’s increase the already bloated government by rewarding those who go into government service with a forgiveness of student loans in half the time than if they choose a different career path. (No offense to those who work for the government. I just think that kind of policy is plain and simply wrong.)”

Not sure how she proved that the government being bloated would increase. Perhaps these people would be filling jobs that already exist.

Frankly, there should be nothing wrong with serving your government as a way of encouraging graduates to want to give something back after working at paying back massive student loan debt.

This strikes as criticism for the sake of criticism.

Booker Rising:
http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/01/state-of-union-speech-bookerista_27.html

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “I forgot he was black tonight for an hour”

MSNBC host and commentator Chris Matthews has a habit of making comments that make you shake your head in disbelief.

Matthews offered yet another in regard to President Obama’s State of the Union speech:

MATTHEWS: You know, I was trying to think about who he was tonight, and it’s interesting: He is post-racial by all appearances. You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he’s gone a long way to become a leader of this country and passed so much history in just a year or two. I mean, it’s something we don’t even think about.

I was watching, I said, Wait a minute, he’s an African-American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is President of the United States and we’ve completely forgotten that tonight — completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don’t think terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard — a very subtle fact. It’s so hard to even talk about; maybe I shouldn’t talk about it, but I am.

Well, Chris, we almost forgot how foolish you can be, but then you typically bring us back to reality.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/27/matthews-obama-black/

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201001270078

John McCain … Maverick In Name Only

Sen. John McCain always tried to portray himself as a so-called “maverick” while he was on the campaign trail. But, during and after Wednesday’s State of the Union address from President Obama, for former candidate for the White House proved that he is just another Washington insider playing the game of politics. In other words, Sen. John McCain is a politician like all the rest, as he proved again when he went on Sean Hannity’s far-right Fox News show and uttered the words below.

“What we’re hearing tonight is ‘BIOB’ — let’s call it that from now on. Blame it on Bush. Whatever has gone wrong, let’s blame it on Bush. I think the people of Massachusetts last Tuesday pretty well rejected that line of conversation.”

Voters rejected Sen. McCain’s message during the campaign and should reject it now. The campaign is over and John McCain has revealed his true self as a right-wing partisan who struggles to see any good from the other side and mistakes facts for blame.

John McCain (who wears his far-right cap when he goes on Fox News) must have missed the part where the president accepted the blame for the portion of the deficit he claimed responsibility for last night.

Also, Sen. McCain is misguided. Massachusetts voters likely rejected that Democrats have not done enough to bring the radical change they expected (we’re still in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Democrats are not standing firm on health care, etc.).

Is Sen. McCain crazy enough to think that Massachusetts are troubled by Democrats holding President Bush (whose approval ratings where somewhere around the high 20s to low 30s when he left office) accountable for what happened on his watch? Come on, now!

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/27/mccain-sotu-obama/