Palin reminds me So Much of the student who didn’t do the week’s reading and tries to fake it.
You can’t teach that.
“We must not blink, Charlie…”
As reprehensible as her opinions are, she seems to know her shit. She does NOT strike me as a student trying to fake it.
She knows who her constituents are. She knows what they want to hear and she didn’t blink.
I’m paraphrasing but she said “Yes, we’ll do whatever it takes. Even if it means breaking international laws or making morally ambiguous decisions”.
Gibson might have thought he was tripping her up but it seems that he – like you, Jon – seem to misunderstand the nature of the beast.
With each insistence that she give a clear answer, Gibson wasn’t painting her into a corner. He was helping her to cement her unabashed position in the minds of her constituents.
You need to be afraid. Very afraid.
“You need to be afraid. Very afraid.”
I have to say, that sounds familiar.
As I said many years ago, “The only thing to fear is fear itself.”
I think that’s what I said.
Jon, Armand, you’re both right. She clearly did not know what Charlie meant by “The Bush Doctrine.” She then used the opportunity to respond with statements designed to appeal to her constituents.
Remember the scene in The Front where Woody Alan’s character has to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee? He’s given the advice that you don’t have to answer the questions. You do have to respond to them. Sarah answers when she can and she always responds with a pitch.
I think the subtlety of her not actually answering will be lost on far too many people.
Perfect Republican script…Just have a list of answers, 1 through 20. Use them in response to any questions, 1 through 20. The low-information voters will remember the answers, not the questions. They’re remember the smile, not the thoughts.
Earlier this week on NPR, during a discussion of the upcoming Sarah Palin interview, one of the interviewees suggested that the Republican strategy would be that whenever foreign policy questions arise, she will turn those answers to “energy policy.” And that is exactly what she did.
I’ve never seen petulance like that in a high government figure. The times I’ve seen it in the professional world, it’s always been a sign of considerable immaturity.
Bush had his default tone of exasperated defensiveness, but he still came across like a grown-up.
This is a whole new world of Unprepared, and with the actuary tables being what they are, a victory by McCain means a 20% chance of seeing President Palin before 2012.
I think you underestimate the ability of Jon and others to understand “the nature of the beast.” She obviously did not understand Gibson’s question, and she answered to her base, the subtext to her words being, “I’ll kill anything that moves, if I even get the slightest whiff of ‘Islamic Terrorists. In fact, I am going to use every question you ask, Charlie, as an opportunity to use phrases like ‘hellbent on destroying our nation’ and other fear-reminding and inducing language, Charlie.”
That isn’t lost on anybody here. It’s not subtle.
It’s just sad.
I have to agree with Armand — she’s securing the base. The question is, will moderates interpret the Palin interview as liberals or conservative do.
Per the uberconservative guy I know:
“You are so far off the mark I don’t even know where to start. I mean really this must be up to interpretation because these two videos are strong evidence FOR McCain/Palin. I think her answers were clear cut and to the point. At no point in time have I heard “umm”s or “uhh”s like Obama and was very well spoken.
in regards to her not knowing the Bush Doctrine, maybe she didn’t understand it completely but she wasn’t far off and then emphisized her point after Gibson pointed more out and it ABSOLUTELY was relevant to what she was talking about.
It must just be really hard to see a powerful conservative woman in this position.
I do find it interesting that Gibson was very condonsending the whole interview as if no answer she would give would be good enough, for a happy speaker you could tell she was a little hostile with answers because of the wording of the questions.”
What an abomination that this person could be one step away from the Presidency in a few months, if the tide doesn’t turn. But the fight is anything but over. Check out Gloria Steinem’s tenacious op-ed in today’s LA Times:
Whoa. That one had me punching the air in wholesale agreement. The best frontal attack on the “Palin Phenomenon” I’ve yet seen. Here’s to more like it. ..
Steinem op-ed link:
@Burnett, michealmeme, Mason Dixon:
She DID answer the question.
In no unequivocal terms.
She didn’t respond – she answered. Truthfully.
Gibson might have thought he was exposing her for what she really is. Not realizing that in doing so he is not harming her one bit.
And while I would agree wholeheartedly that there’s nothing to fear but fear itself, Palin represents that fear.
I’ll expand on that last remark:
Palin is here to make that fear permanent. To make that fear real. Not only Americans’ illogical fear of two-bit countries and brown people. I’m also talking about the oh-so-real fear the rest of the world has of a NeoCon America.
Implicit in the mantra “there is nothing to fear but fear itself” is that fear itself IS to be feared.
You NEED to be afraid of her. Very afraid.
All you liberals nonchalantly dismissing Palin’s fear mongering and obliviousness to world affairs – while the Rep ticket is climbing high in the polls – are burying your heads in the sand.
You still live under the impression that reason will prevail, when in fact, history teaches quite the opposite.
The internet and Jon’s blog won’t save you (and the rest of the world) from four more years of a NeoCon administration.
In all probability, the internet itself, in its present form, won’t survive such an administration. It can easily go the way of habeus corpus.
It’s not sad. It’s scary.
Not just Palin’s comments, but also your inability to take her threats seriously.
Unprepared student, my ass. It is YOU who are unprepared.
Obama has a real chance of losing this one.
And if he does there won’t be another Obama, or another message of hope, in four years.
I wish Jon would make another “poll tracking bounce” post, as he so gleefully did whenever Barack would scratch the 48% mark.
As far as I remember he never hit the 50% mark that McCain just passed.
It might wake some of you people up.
Take a look at this bit of criticism, and let us know if you still feel the same way – especially about answers being clear and to the point.
I’m not saying that her performance is going to give GOP Convention-going types pause for thought, but this election isn’t all about them. It’s also about the effect those folks can have on the undecided independents. From that perspective, last night’s showing looks like a real setback.
After all, it’s not the “powerful & conservative” part that’s hard; it’s the fact that she’s totally out of her depth.
And being a woman really doesn’t have anything to do with it. That same combination – power, zealotry, and ignorance – swiftly became the toxic hallmark of the current administration.
If you’re going to suggest that people are being sexist, it’s important to back that up with a demonstration that they’re implicitly holding women to a lower standard than men, or demanding that they perform significantly better to be considered just as good.
I still had more to say apparently:
While Gibson thinks he is exposing Palin and her views as immoral, her base can finally give a sigh of relief that they no longer have to hide their views behind some PC bullshit anymore.
It’s finally out there.
I can only imagine a “working class white person” (PC for rednecks, no?) watching this and saying “Yeah! Tell it like it is!”
For him/her, Palin’s disregard of Pakistan’s sovereignty is a GOOD thing.
And that she’s not afraid to put it out there only instills more confidence in her.
This interview, to me, shows the ineffectual media for what it is – PC bullshit. Words, words and more words.
And by extension it highlights Dems’ and liberals’ Achilles’ heel – the American PC mentality and unwillingness to get their hands dirty, even when their country’s future is at stake.
“Bush Doctrine”? That’s a liberal term.
She could care less what the media think Bush’s doctrine is. She doesn’t WANT to know what it means.
This interview is a MAJOR bounce for Palin – not flinching in front of that stuffy self-righteous reporter.
Gibson isn’t tripping her up. He’s helping her.
The political discourse for this campaign HAS shifted. If Obama is to win this election he has to show he is capable of moving with the times.
He can’t do that by repeating his DNC talking points.
That’s yesterday’s discourse.
You’re right – we do need to be careful about fear, and that there’s plenty to fear in Palin.
The essential thing to remember is *why* we need to watch out for fear – it’s because it leads to extraordinary acts of Stupid. It’s like a short-circuit for reason.
Case it point: a Texas town that shut off the fire hydrants because of ‘terrorism’ (they were truly worried about the possibly of terrorists poisoning their water supply). Of course, this is problematic for fire fighters. But the solution there was to provide them with a ‘special tool’. Clearly, no one stopped to think that any terrorist motivated enough to poison a small Texas town could also figure out how to handle basic mechanics. All this came to light when some guy’s house burned to the ground as fire-fighters just stood back and watched, unable to access the water they needed to save the day.
So yes, realize that Palin represents a serious threat. But don’t respond by loosing your mind, or becoming reactionary. Instead, make her be the one to defend the colossal stupidity that her fear-fueled approach as precipitated, and ask about all the daily defense mechanisms we’re shutting down in order to prepare for what amounts to a total statistical anomaly.
Karl Rove pointed out that you don’t attack people on their weakness. You go after the strength. The bulldog with lipstick is supposed to be a good thing, adored by the base. It’s time to present it for what it is: a massive liability.
Caribou Barbie* says, “Foreign Policy is HARD!”
*(phrasing from The Knitting Curmudgeon)
I was quoting commentary from a conservative who I’ve been volleying back and forth with on my blog this morning.
I think she’s ignorant and arrogant; I’m in the liberal camp on this one.
Though I will send your provided link to my conservative buddy for feedback.
I still look forward to finding out whether moderates saw the moose in the headlights or the articulate, ready to lead VP.
you keep trying to post Steinem’s op-ed
There it is.
Just as a general FYI to peeps.
About a week ago, several NYC women sent an e-mail to 40 contacts asking for their feedback on Palin and why women shouldn’t support her. WIth the power of the internet, they have already received more than 100,000 responses, which they’re posting at intervals on their blog
No “umm’s” or “uhh’s” could also indicate that she’s not *thinking* about her answers, that they are already formulated and she is working off the script. Actors don’t say Umm and Uhh either. Real people do.
I don’t think it’s too far off the mark to insist that the VP should have a VERY CLEAR understanding of the Bush Doctrine, among thousands of other things.
What’s really hard is to see a powerful conservative woman link the war in Iraq with 9/11 years after even the Bush administration has disavowed the connection.
It appears that her greatest wish is to get this natural gas pipeline underway, and if she has to become vice-president to do it, that’s fine with her, even though by many accounts, this is only in the planning stage.
She is not ready to be the leader of the US. What she IS ready for is the attention, the limelight, which she obviously basks in. The only thing that would lead her to believe she is, is an Alaska sized ego.
People see what they want to see, hear what they want to hear. But many “uberconcervatives”, of which my family is almost wholly comprised, seem to have a special gift for this.
Also, the ability to compartmentalize, and say things like, “I’m not as socially conservative as she is, but she was a GREAT Governor, and I think she’s cute as a bug.” When pressed about what was so GREAT about her as a Governor, knowing full well that they’d never heard of her once before the announcement, they parrot back the script – reformer, sold the plane on E-Bay, etc. And when pressed about why they are so willing to compromise on the conservative social agenda, why, if they are pro-choice would they risk the Supreme Court appointments that will surely come, they drift off, become vague and say Roe v.Wade won’t be overturned. There will be too much of an outcry.
That is what’s hard. Among thousands of other things.
By the way, if this were Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Olympia Snowe, we wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.
And no, liberals don’t like ‘getting their hands dirty’ – not when that means invading the wrong damn country, and precipitating a civil war because they couldn’t be bothered to think through the consequences of their actions.
You’re right that the more ignorant, aggressive and generally violent elements of our society love to see us dropping bombs and firing guns. But the shoot-first aim-later approach (we don’t give a fuck if Pakistan considers itself sovereign – our might makes us right) is categorically wrong, in just about every regard. And we have the fiasco in Iraq to prove it.
Yes, Palin said ‘mistakes were made’ but she didn’t bother to enumerate what they were, or say what lessons have been learned. As far as we know, her only regret is that we didn’t go nuclear.
What she did say was that her views were, in essence, right in line with the Bush Doctrine, even if she didn’t know what, exactly, the Bush Doctrine was, or realize that how completely discredited it’s become.
It’s also clear that her prep didn’t include a review od Machiavelli, who makes the point that no prince (and by extension, no empire) can be truly safe if it makes itself despised and hated. Palin Power does exactly this – it makes people hate us. And then there’s the Blowback – a reality that seems to have been lost on Palin, seven years to the day after 9/11/01.
Telling the world that the only sovereignty we take seriously is our own is not the way to make friends. Conversely, if we have friends, and those friends are beholden to us in some way, then chances are good that a President focused on shadowy threats to collective and open society can probably do what he wants, efficiently, thoroughly, and very very quietly.
The fact that the GOP base is completely unable to see this is all the more reason they need to be voted into oblivion. They are the single greatest threat to national security that we face.
Armand, Dude, wtf are you talking about? We’re not asleep. We’ve all been here. We KNOW Gibson helped her! WE KNOW SHE SPEAKS TO HER BASE!
*All you liberals nonchalantly dismissing Palin’s fear mongering and obliviousness to world affairs – while the Rep ticket is climbing high in the polls – are burying your heads in the sand.
You still live under the impression that reason will prevail, when in fact, history teaches quite the opposite.*
Duh, really? History? You mean, like, THE PRESENT?
Who says we don’t take the threat of her seriously? Where are you getting this? Because we’re talking about it instead of doing what, shitting ourselves? Organizing Posses?
WE GET IT, ALL RIGHT??!!
Stop with the lecturing.
You’re still in the building yelling, “FIRE!!!!”,
while the rest of us are outside, trying not to let it burn to the ground.
Yes, Mason, and thanks to the whack jobs in local government, there’s no water in the hydrants because of ‘the terrorism’.
Armand gets it. This is the critical phrase: “we’ll do whatever it takes”.
That is precisely what Bush said.
When a leader says that, you might want to believe them.
There are other ways to parse those answers and the quality of the interview, but that is the only phrase she used that would actually cause me alarm. There are limits to power. BushCo didn’t believe that and we didn’t hear him say the one thing that should have set off alarm bells:
“we’ll do whatever it takes”.
So, Len and Armand,
What are you suggesting? What’s the solution?
I believed Bush was dangerous. He was. Everything he said in the lead up to the war set off my alarm bells. Everytime I hear the word “smoking” or “gun” or “mushroom” or “cloud” or “terrist” as he continues to mispronounce it, my alarm bells still go off.
I believe she is dangerous. Five alarm. So do millions of other people, other good, patriotic, God-fearing people. John McCain is dangerous. Scares me to f**king death.
What’s your suggestion? I mean besides continually (and smugly) suggesting that nobody else “gets it”?
“Mistakes were made”…that’s the most bullshit of passive voice excuses. Someone or a group of people made the mistakes, and they should damned well be held responsible. “Mistakes were made” is how people weasel out of responsibility. Mistakes don’t make themselves. Who made the mistakes that Ms. Palin is referring to? Why is she afraid to be strong and name the responsible parties? Because our leaders have been using this kind of excuse for too long.
Truman…”The buck stops here.” It always stops somewhere with someone.
It seems to me that you are writing from the point of view of someone who is very afraid.
And if I understand your counsel, you advise us all to follow you and also be very afraid.
Why would one want to do that? Do you think that people make better decisions when they are afraid, and even better ones when they are very afraid? In that case, you might as well advise people to panic.
I’m sorry, kind sir, but I will never receive counsel from someone who is very afraid, and even less so, from an anonymous correspondent on a web site who goes by the handle of an actor, and even less than that if he actually is an actor.
And that is why you are Mr. T Bone Burnett, and I, I am just a humble sharecropper.
Hats off to you, sir.
Rick – that may be the stance for Obama to take. People recognize ‘the buck stops here’ as real leadership. Assuming it’s credible, they respond to it favorably, regardless of political outlook.
McCain started to do this in his acceptance speech, but pulled his punch. And now he’s got Palin running as a ‘reformer’ who uses the passive voice when it’s inconvenient to be specific or name names.
This creates a great opportunity or Obama, who can now attack her on her supposed strength, while reminding people where the buck really stops.
I think another way of seeing what our actor friend may mean is to recognize the forest in these trees. She has nothing to lose. She gets to say what she wants. It isn’t her position or lack of knowledge that is important here. It’s that by speaking up she is putting pressure on everyone to make a decision. Obama is up to that. I don’t know if Biden can. But for me the main thing is that she is bringing it on, and if we and Obama can’t match that then we don’t deserve to win. Wake up America.
Of course, not everybody is going to listen:
I’m really beginning to think that our crisis in education has reached magnificent proportions. Socrates was *so* right.
“She has nothing to lose.”
In reality, she has something, so she has something to lose.
The Republicans have a lot to loose. Four more years to keep the Democrats away from White House records is plenty valuable.
The mistake is thinking that they have any intention of putting ‘Country First’. Expect plenty of fast shredding if Obama wins.
Being afraid is the wrong response. She doesn’t scare me. Obama does a little and the reason is so much of his campaign support has been an Us Vs Them. I don’t think that’s a winning approach. It doesn’t appeal to our better angels. It muzzles them. It generates atavism and that generates fear.
In short, I am not afraid of either of them as people. Again, to me, this looks a Spy Vs Spy.
What to do? Today gas prices are going north fast. They will come back down, but on Sunday, my wife will call my neighbors and we’ll practice the full-car policy. We may even drop off some Baptists. Is this a lot? No, but it doesn’t take a lot to kill fear.
Laughter kills fear. Music can too. A good dinner can especially if shared with friends.
Instead of getting together with friends and talking about what rotters The Others are, ask what it is they do that is winning? Steal that.
This is the election that the Democrats said they could not lose. If they are, then they are doing something wrong and instead of blaming The Stupid People, you might want to figure out what you’re doing wrong because this is an election and Stupid People Vote. That whole “We don’t Need The Hillary Supporters” was pretty danged dumb. We don’t need 18 million voters. Putting her face on urinal cakes? Smart? Not hardly. You need her now and her supporters are laughing at you out loud. They aren’t afraid of you. They know how to wait for four years and they know that McCain is NOT Bush. They know that a minority executive and majority Congress can stop any judicial appointments. They know they can tie congress in knots.
They know McCain would have to cross the aisle.
So instead of whipping up more fear, try a little tenderness. That is what is working for Palin.
She isn’t someone that should be scrambling your jets like that. She is Mom.
What SHOULD scare you is that ‘anything it takes’ line. It only works if you let it.
First, the world isn’t crumbling. The Bad Guys aren’t at the gates. And yes, the price of gas will keep going up. We elected the SOB and we bought the SUVs. We’re going to have to clean this up with or without the government.
Time to make a deal. So I ask again, what do you want? Dump the personality politics because they are blinding you with rage and enabling your opponent to get the better of you.
Deal. What …. do…. you… want?
Len- You are missing the point. It’s the republicans who are running on personality. They want to avoid the issues, because if this election is about the issues, they lose.
Everyone should just take a deep breath. I really don’t think the American people can be fooled. Remember the congressional election of 2006. Three weeks out Karl Rove predicted that the old National Security trope would favor the Republicans and they would retain control of both House and Senate. But they couldn’t scare people into voting for the Republicans.
I don’t think it will work this time either. Those of us who have been with Obama for 17 months have gone through many agonizing weeks like this last one. And everytime the campaign does the right thing.
A man of faith, Jon? Good. Me too.
What I hope is that everyone’s campaign does the right thing.
I will admit that there is real fear in my words.
And I would also concede that it weakens my stance somewhat.
There IS something in Republican rhetoric that works. That thing that works is the appeal to the gut and not the brain.
And while this can lead in many cases to distortions and wrong conclusions, there is also some truth there.
Our “gut instinct” is a form of heuristic. And sometimes it has to be trusted. Reps know this and manipulate it to their ends. But the flip side of this is that liberals eschew it as frivolous – targeting only our logic and common sense.
While my intellect says that nothing has changed, and that McCain/Palin only prove what Obama’s been saying all along, my gut tells me something else.
My gut tells me there has been a real shift.
And as a Darwinian creature I sometimes defer to my gut even before I can formulate the logic behind it.
I will however try to try to formulate some logic behind my fears:
While it is obvious that McCain and Palin do not offer anything remotely similar to the change Obama is offering, it would be a mistake to presume the change they offer isn’t real.
The McCain/Palin ticket DOES offer change (and change has been the “gut currency” of this entire election cycle).
The change they offer is an end to political correctness. The change they offer is an end to pandering to a liberal-slanted media (yes, real reporters ARE liberal. They wouldn’t make good reporters if they weren’t). The change they offer is an end to Double Talk. They are saying “I will no longer try to excuse immoral actions, and weasel myself out of them with PC terms. I will admit to immoral actions if they serves my interests. I will no longer hide my true ideals.”
In effect McCain’s promise of a “Straight Talk Express” is finally coming true. And the voters are lapping it up. It’s what they’ve been clamoring for all along.
These ARE the issues.
They’re only pretending it’s about the personalities to keep the liberals sleepy.
To me, this is clear as day. My gut tells me so.
And the sooner everyone else sees it, the better chance to turn the wheel back.
Fear requires an object. If one turns his attention from the object of the fear to the fear itself, the fear is dispelled.
Just saw your last comment. I think you’re wrong.
This is not like any of the “agonizing weeks” Obama’s campaign has seen before.
I remember hearing Obama’s name for the first time when he won the Ohio caucus.
I remember my gut telling me there is something DIFFERENT here.
I started following him then, and everything that has happened since has only cemented my belief that he will be the next president of the United States.
No setback has made me doubt that initial hypothesis. Neither did the choosing of Palin as McCain’s VP candidate.
Recent polls have confused me for a while – till I saw this interview. And until I saw how liberals were reacting to it (I take Jon’s words and opinions quite seriously).
You’re still addressing 20th century issues with 20th century rhetoric and bias.
In my humble (well, not that humble) opinion this is a blind spot. A dangerous blind spot.
To refer to this thing or to even think about it gives it power. That is obvious.
This is a dramatic thread.
There is a lot of writing. Much of it feels like reading the same phrases over and over.
What are you guys who spend so much time writing on this board, who seem so concerned about this thing you seem to be so concerned about, what are you actually doing about it?
The McCain/Palin ticket DOES offer change ..
an end to political correctness. … an end to pandering to a liberal-slanted media… an end to Double Talk. They are saying “I will no longer try to excuse immoral actions, and weasel myself out of them with PC terms. I will admit to immoral actions if they serves my interests. I will no longer hide my true ideals.”
Um, no. McCain/Palin are 100% pure Double Talk.
They don’t disagree with Bush on anything, yet claim to represent “change”. They present “earmarks” as the single most important thing to change, yet Palin was the per capita Champion of Earmarks as both Mayor and Governor. Nevermind the fact that earmarks represent a tiny fraction of actual Federal spending — zeroing them out would accomplish approximately nothing fiscally.
Palin is hard-core anti-choice (even in cases of rape and incest) yet likes to sugar coat this with double talk about “respect for others’ views”. Tell that to the women and doctors she would have arrested!
You’re right, however, that fear is powerful and Obama/Biden need to give people a more visceral fear of what McPain will really mean to them: more militarism abroad, more reverse Robin Hood tax changes, status quo broken healthcare, more bankruptcy, etc. etc.
T-Bone: “what are you actually doing about it?” I for one am going to leave my desk shortly and head to the local Obama HQ to make sure our VoIP phone bank is in top shape for an afternoon of calling.
Well done, Seth. That, in my view, is the best antidote to this angst.
If Obama brings fear and Palin brings cookies, Obama will lose.
What you feel Armand is choice. Good or bad, until Palin entered the race, the electorate didn’t think they had a choice. They watched the DNC steamroll Hillary Clinton and were about to accept the inevitability meme being foisted on them. With the very first day Palin was introduced, they began to smile. They felt, ok, here is a real choice.
I don’t think people here ‘get it’. When humans are deprived of control over their personal choices, they will chew off their own arms to get it back. American settlers could not make slaves of American Indians in most cases because the Indian would starve themselves to death first.
You don’t get it. You think you are offering them a choice for change, and all you are actually doing is scaring them. The jury didn’t free Jabez Stone because he was innocent.
To answer T-Bone: nothing. In good conscience I can’t vote Republican, and Obama’s tactics over Clinton forfeit any claim to my support. The ends don’t justify the means.
“I don’t think people here ‘get it’. When humans are deprived of control over their personal choices, they will chew off their own arms to get it back.”
The people here that you refer to are themselves humans.
It would seem your anger at Obama, even to the point of calling him Stepin Fetchit with a law degree, is getting the best of you.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m starting to think that you think, if I’m reading this right, that nobody gets it. Is that right? Other than you and Armand? Nobody else “gets it”? Maybe I’m just reading into it…
And what kind of cookies is she bringing?
That’s mau mauing, T-Bone. I’m not angry at anyone. I’m disappointed in the Democratic ticket that at this time with this candidate they would allow what happened to Hillary Clinton to happen. Race doesn’t bother me the way it does you. I’ve lived in mixed neighborhoods all of my life.
Wanta learn about race? Grow up in Alabama in the 1960s. Grow up through forced integration.
How many sides of that story do you really know, or did you just learn the songs but live in in the separate but equal neighborhoods so easily found if you had the money?
Someone used a white hillbilly character. I pointed out a black hillbilly character. You respond with insinuated race and anger. All I’ve done is show the hypocrisy on both sides of this.
What makes me angry is that you and yours would use this topic for political power where once it was shared for justice. That’s wrong.
Give us Hagee. We give you Pfleger.
Give us King. We give you Lincoln.
And so it goes. Spy vs Spy comparison.
Not for justice. For votes.
If you want to call me a racist, do it. But be a man about it. Don’t insinuate.
Tell you what; you tell me your personal history of race and what you did about it, and I’ll tell you mine. I lived with it all of my life.
I don’t want to hear about what you were told, what you read, what you think. Tell me what you saw.
Man, you got to twist one up.
I am filled with mirth.
In all kindness, you are wrong about every single thing you wrote in your post above.
When you wrote the phrase, Stepin Fetchit with a law degree, it was not about “a black hillbilly character”. You were referring to Barack Obama. It is no use to throw up all this flak in an attempt to obfuscate that indiscretion.
My father used to tell me, “Don’t say anything behind someone’s back that you wouldn’t say to his face.”
In this case, I stand here for my friend. You would not say those words to Barack’s face.
I have never posted an angry word in this public forum. Nothing I have written has been written in anger. Nor do I, as you suggest above, want to call you a racist. I agree that it is wrong to use, as you say, this topic, race, for political gain. The Republicans have been doing that since the Southern Strategy of the 1980’s. You have no idea of my own views on the topic. I kidded you in a friendly way, and you reacted, well, violently. You began swinging wildly. You didn’t land a single punch.
You are dead wrong about Barack. And about other things, too. It is not Spy vs Spy. (You must have spent a good deal of time with Mad Magazine in your youth as you use that phrase with great frequency.) There is no left wing equivalent to Michael Savage on the radio. Nor is there a left wing equivalent any of the other uber-hostile rage merchants of the right. They are in a class of their own.
Please stop it, Len. I trust you are a nice guy. But you deceive yourself. You are making yourself look bad.
Try a little tenderness. Try a little humility. It would be very much in your best interest to come up with some good questions and leave all the facile and over-rehearsed answers behind. They are only weighing you down. Let’s go forward.
Peace and love.
Correction: The Southern Strategy that began the 1970’s.
(And never, of course has this strategy been as blatant as it is in this election. See Taplin’s post, Conservatives and Racism.)
Richard Nixon strategist Kevin Phillips popularized the Southern Strategy. In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, he touched on its essence:
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that… but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
Boyd, James (May 17, 1970). “Nixon’s Southern strategy: ‘It’s All in the Charts'”, The New York Times, pp. 215.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.