Fuzzy Rant(s): Hate, Old Media Hacks, and Random Observations

So I’m following the craziness that’s going on with much interest, and I must say that it’s all rather horrific, so it’s rant time at Fuzzy Central.  Or more like a volley of mini-rants.

Shirley Sherrod (or How I Grew Into a More Nuanced Hater)

I first saw this video over at Jim Hoft’s Gateway Pundit, and I find it amusing that the left is having a hissy fit about this, apparently claiming “Foul!” because the video was “edited” and “taken out of context.”  Uh huh.  The video I saw at GP makes it very clear that the racist ramblings–about how that white farmer was trying to “prove” that he was “superior” and how she was pondering whether or not to help him or how much to help him and her assertion that she didn’t do all that she could because she was thinking about black farmers who had lost their farms and he was white and therefore somehow not deserving of help . . . blah blah racist  blah blah blah–were part of a narrative designed to set the stage for the point of her speech.  This, too, is in the video and now being trumpeted as some kind of evidence that Sherrod was mistreated.  She moved past her racism, she realized (somehow) that “it” (?) “wasn’t about black and white” (or well, “it is about black and white” but), it’s even more about the “haves” and the “have nots.”  Hating whitey is soooo limited, you see.  We have to nuance our hate, give it dimension, so like all good progressive socialists, she determines that some white people are okay after all!  Woohoo!  What a relief.  These acceptable white people are poor, “have nots.”  With these crakkas, she can join forces against the most hated whites of all:  the haves.  And discriminate against them, instead. 

Well, I’m glad she cleared that up.  So much better to be a progressive socialist bent on big government, nanny state fascism.  Whew!  Close call there.

The Journolist Cranks, Crackpots, and Crazies

For decades, the media has seen its job as not only of informing the people but of interpreting the meaning of stories and events for them, setting the national tone and even influencing policy.  We know this.  This sense of themselves as not only the conveyors of the news but as the shapers of American minds became so heightened during the BO campaign that they began behaving in what can only be termed an unethical manner–hiding stories, burying them, and now we learn, actively plotting to call people racists for no reason other than to deflect attention from BO’s bestest Marxist, America-hating, black supremacist “reverend.”  Okay, we kind of knew they purposefully played the “race card,” too.  But isn’t there something sinister about actually seeing it in black and white, knowing the depths they will sink to in order to get their way?

Bob Schieffer’s embarrassment and disgrace at not knowing about the Black Panther case and the allegations against the DOJ should be an eye-opener for him and for every other journalist who still has any integrity left.  (But it won’t be)

All I can say is that the conservative uprising we are experiencing and a part of needs to find ways beyond Fox and the internet to reach the American people.  Too many people are still relying on these conspiring, hate-filled, unscrupulous leftist ideologues for their news, and we just aren’t reaching as many people as we need to.

Random Observations

Have you noticed how easy it is for leftists to spew venom and vileness while still somehow convincing themselves they’re “good” and “tolerant” people, even superior to everyone else?

Have you noticed that a favorite leftist tactic is to posit some extreme as a straw man and then end all discussion?  Example: those darn Tea Partiers are against government-run healthcare, but they’re on SS or MediCare.  This is ridiculous, of course, and the equivalent of our saying, those darned socialist progressives want big government to tell them where to live, what career to pursue, etc.  Yes, that’s the extreme (and exactly what would have to happen, as it did in Mao’s China), but I sincerely doubt that any citizen lefty would think that a great idea.

Have you noticed the GOP stepping back from the Tea Party movement?

Have you noticed that this president has no fear, none, that he’ll lose in 2012?  And have you wondered why that is?

.

.

.

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “Fuzzy Rant(s): Hate, Old Media Hacks, and Random Observations

  1. I'm reading your blog while listening to O'Riley in the background… He's interviewing Kirsten whats her name, that bimbo that's the token progressive Fox News contributor… Point being, she actually sat there with a straight face and said that Van Jones being a communist and being appointed to a high ranking job in the Obama administration was not worthy of being reported on by the media… These people are out of their minds…

  2. I have noticed those things. As we saw in the campaign BO can be a master of propaganda. The fact that he seems to not even be trying to change public perception of him, is disturbing. As for the GOP I have a rant for them.

  3. Have you noticed that this president has no fear, none, that he'll lose in 2012? And have you wondered why that is?

    This is what keeps me up at night. I keep wondering to myself, “What will be the national 'emergency' that will require we have no elections?”

  4. @ Born Again American, that Kirsten (or whatever) gets on my last nerve. She's completely brainwashed and sounds like an idiot at least 80% of the time (the other 20% she's backpeddling, which is at least amusing to watch). And the thing about her babblings (yes, I caught that last night, even though I usually don't watch O'Reilly anymore) was how completely un-self aware she is: leftists think that “news” is when Sarah Palin gets a haircut but not when a self-proclaimed communist interested in taking jobs from one group to give to another . . . for “social justice” is in the WH. It's not worth mentioning that the DOJ has decided not to prosecute black crimes against white victims, but running a segment on something Glenn Beck says, though, that's “newsworthy.” *shakes head* These people are absolute nuts.

    @ Trestin, yes, it's very odd that BO has zero interest in his plummeting numbers or any concern about wooing the indies back. Odd and frightening. And yes, the GOP is a whole separate rant . . . I have one brewing, too.

    @ Betsi, it keeps me up, too. I think they are banking on and working their little tyrannical hearts out on inciting an all-out, blood flowing in the streets race war, but they're not going to get it. Plan B? I have no idea (okay, I have SOME ideas . . . heh).

  5. I don't think it's weird.

    Obama is convinced that 1: This stuff will work itself out eventually…and 2: He can survive his poll numbers being in the tank.

    When you're a leftist, there are no delusions you can't justofy if you ignore reality hard enough.

  6. Okay Fuzzy, I know this is a rant but…

    Condemning Sherrod for something she did not mean to be the point of her story (being racist against White people) and then condemning her for something she did not say (I hate the “haves”) is not best thing to do Fuzzy. You shouldn't assign beliefs to somebody– even in a rant. They should be held accountable to what they say and do, not simply for what you believe them to think.

    BTW, far more telling is the NAACP audience's reaction to that moment in her story.

    “Have you noticed that this president has no fear, none, that he'll lose in 2012? And have you wondered why that is?”

    Obama is unconcerned about re-election partly because he's been living in a self-built shell since his teen years. Baseless faith in himself and blaming others seems to color just about every aspect of his political strategy. He's been deluded– or taking part in a delusion– for years (you don't sit through Rev. Wright's sermons for how many years and not be…)

    I gotta disagree with Trestin, Obama's not a master of propaganda– he's a beneficiary of the MSM's racial largess and fervent need to prove themselves to not be racists (along with their need to prove everyone opponent is). The sun, moon, planets, and stars all aligned to allow Obama to be voted in (BTW, that's a metaphor). It helped tremendously that his Leftist radicalism coincided with their own.

    @ Betsy

    This sounds like 9/11 truthers. Please…

    Fuzzy you wrote: “I think they are banking on and working their little tyrannical hearts out on inciting an all-out, blood flowing in the streets race war, but they're not going to get it.”

    Who is banking on a race war, Fuzzy?! Obama? Calm down, and look to past political strategies for clues as to what will happen in the future, and not fearmongering.

    BTW, all of this comment is said in a friendly spirit, and by someone who respects you enough to engage in an honest conversation.

  7. I don't think there will be a race war. That would descend quickly into something that Obama could not control. Personally, I think there will be a “Reichstag Fire” of some sort. Whether they can exhort some radical group into doing it, or they will stage something themselves, they need a crisis that they can tightly control. They need to have an excuse to silence the movement. So, if they can pull it off, they can justify the effort to arrest people, shut down our blogs and forums, control talk radio, and censor FOX. They want to do it, they have repeatedly demonstrated the desire, so they only need the justification.

    Great post, Fuzzy.

  8. Media: I knew a lot were activists, knowing full well the depth of their lies, but I entertained the idea that many were just stupid. Which is forgivable, unlike the former. Heck, that's even one of the 10 'Bearing False Witness' and they do it in a major way.

    The left: Yes, there seems to be an example each day where some visible lefty wishes pain and death on some right wing target. Usually Rush, which certainly makes the case Rush knows what he's talking about, for Truth hurts most of all. I wish I could listen to him but I just don't want to hear the names of certain people 10 times a day, every day.
    The left really are children. They get their talking point, deploy it on their favorite forum, and refuse to debate any further (because it's not possible to do so) or accept it's absurdity.

    Tea Party: I don't believe I'm really up to speed on it. But it seems that many politicians are joining. That may be a good thing. It may be time to leave the 'republican' party in the dust bin. Certainly the likes of M Steele and J McCain.

    obama losing in 2012: I now believe he/they knew that going in because they will have at least put the legislation in place to enact every liberal dream of the last 40 years by Jan 2011. Like a suicide bomber.

  9. @ KS, hopefully, he's just egotistical and arrogant as you imply. 🙂

    @ Yukio, no worries, I know we have mutual respect and don't take offense when you comment 🙂 As to your points, she didn't say she “hates” the haves, but she did say, rather explicitly that her thinking shifted from “black and white” (though that does matter, she insists) to the “haves and have nots.”

    Re: her racism not being the point of the narrative/speech. Well, it wasn't, but it also was. It was supposed to be about her growing as a person from being a racist to working with the poor/have nots of both races. She also admitted that she did not do all she could (at first) to help that white farmer simply because he was white. That's a crime. Also, if someone stood up and said, well, you know, when I was younger, I killed a few people, but then I found out that was wrong and stopped. What's the point? The point is that they stopped killing, that doesn't mean they never did or that the same personality/person doesn't exist. Sherrod, in my opinion still–in light of the full video, etc., is narrow-minded and makes professional decisions based on her ideology (be it racist, Marxist, whatever). She, like so many on the fringe left, believes that it's okay to use her power and position to impose “social” rather than equal justice. That's a huge problem, and the one that far more threatens our nation right now than racism (though, as we saw with Van Jones, race plays an integral role in his version of “social justice”–not so much for Sherrod after her conversion, but she says it's still important).

    And yes, the members, including apparently Jealous himself (?), were all sitting there amen'ing and approving of her disgusting display of racism and abuse of power (the very things that organization is supposed to stand against, no?). Very telling. But you know, for her to assume that any white person is preening in front of her, feeling or trying to prove themselves superior . . . this is actually a pretty common accusation among blacks. It's wrong, and it's racist, but that's what many do believe. That's a socio-cultural problem, and one that the far left has fostered and fueled (as Sherrod herself even suggests in her full speech–she knows how it works, she was just switching out the pawns and players in the same exact game).

    Heh, you know we are going to keep disagreeing about how ominous this is and what type of threat we face. Don't, however, try to shut down conversation with a leftist tactic–“sounds like 9/11 truthers” is not useful and is designed to close discussion (you know this). Not good. I'm sick to death of people (not you! sort of tangenty now) saying that we can't compare this admin to [fill in your favorite dictator/tyrant/murdering totalitarian]. Of course we can, and we should, particularly considering the great many similarities that exist between this admin and other socialist/communist leaders who've risen to / grabbed power in other countries around the world and throughout history. And they did it by not letting crises go to waste, and in at least one prominent case, possibly manufacturing a crisis to suspend civil rights of the people (the Reichstag fire). The fire happened, the leader used it to create division, the leader used it to suspend all civil rights, including voting rights, of the people. Does the fact that the guy's name was Hitler mean that it's not worth noting? Particularly when one considers the many other tactics that seem to be straight out of Hitler's playbook. Again, we'll disagree about this, but marginalizing (or trying to) good people by applying fabricated “rules” of what's a viable topic of discussion and what is not is not a good idea.

  10. @ Yukio (con't) If you don't like that topic of discussion, don't comment. That's what I do when I see stuff I think is either wrong-headed or nuts. 😉 btw, I'm talking about your comment to Betsi, not to me. We sort of know each other, and I love your mind and discussing things with you. In fact, I wanted to send you one of my posts for feedback/review before I posted to NRB (that's high praise, indeed!).

    As to the race war thing, that's been a dream of the fringe freaks since the 60's and still is. It's what prompted Manson to start his murdering rampage and what the NBPPP leader was talking about when he was talking about killing “crakka” babies to be “free.” It's also a dream of La Raza and its freaks–different races, though. And that all goes back, as you know better than I, to Marx. As to its usefulness to this admin–martial law. To his credit, BO did, back early last year, refute allegations of racism against people who disagree with his policies stating that he didn't believe it, that white people elected him. Truth. But that's literally ALL he's done to bridge the racial divide that is certainly more prominent than it's been since the 60's. His media pets are doing all they can to paint the Tea Party as racists, including suggestions that we are violent–that's not a mistake. They know it's not true. So why push that narrative? To create love, peace, and understanding? I think not.

    I think you're right about BO, too. He has no clue what the American people are about–not even in theory. He just doesn't get it. Without the media to hold him up and his aides (particularly Plough who was just put back on the team) to tell him what “real” America is about, he'd have failed long ago. That said, he does have a very intimate understanding of Alinsky and of the tactics of dictators (his people like to praise Chavez, remember? He had the right idea, after all, without an opposition media, there can be no opposition). We see the admin struggling to shut down Fox, alienate them, even disallow them from WH interviews (later reversed because of admirable push back from the entire WH press pool, who forgot to take their koolaid that morning, I guess). He's good at propaganda, that's absolutely correct–he gets the theory and idea behind it. He fully understands the tactics of propaganda–what he misses is the core of the American people.

    @ Matt, heh, I just used the Reichstag fire as an example in my above comment! I agree, too. I think it's a mistake to underestimate this admin, and that nothing, nothing, is off the table when it comes to furthering their radical agenda. They've made that clear in every possible way.

    @ Kid, I got over thinking the leftist media was “not evil, just wrong.” They are actively plotting to hide the truth and deceive the American people. That may not be “evil,” but it goes far far beyond simply being wrong.

    The GOP is being over-hauled, it won't(and shouldn't be dissolved). They lost their way, proved themselves to be political creatures concerned with elections and spending money not with America or her people. That's why they will all be purged (the big spending, nanny state, entitlement hungry, RINO, progressive types). This group will do exactly what they did leading up to 2006 and 2008–they have shown that they don't get it. So they will have to be replaced. A third party will not work, we have to remake the one we have. We can certainly manage that! 🙂

  11. Re: Sherrod

    You write: “She also admitted that she did not do all she could (at first) to help that white farmer simply because he was white. That's a crime.”

    Sherrod did not work for the government at the time of the events in the story. It's not a crime to not give someone the full benefits of your private services, even if the lack of enthusiasm is due to a racial motivation.

    “Also, if someone stood up and said, well, you know, when I was younger, I killed a few people, but then I found out that was wrong and stopped. What's the point? The point is that they stopped killing, that doesn't mean they never did or that the same personality/person doesn't exist.”

    Surely you are not suggesting that racial bias is equivalent to murder… Are you then suggesting that people are unable to change their beliefs or to reform themselves? If we are to believe that people cannot change their racial prejudices and beliefs then how do you account for the drastic changes in the South since the time of segregation?

    Perhaps Sherrod is “narrow-minded” and perhaps she is on the “fringe-left,” but you offer no proof of this. Her rambling 40+ minute speech could very well be interpretted in a variety of ways. Remember what her job is. Would you not believe that someone working in her field and in her job would believe in charity and largess in a principle not directly inspired by Marx? You and I may both disagree with her about govt. intervention and programs, but to demonize her as a fringe-left with only this speech as proof is silly.

    But all of this misses the point anyway. The point of the video was not to attack Sherrod and get a USDA bureaucrat fired, but to highlight the NAACP's reaction to Sherrod's points.

    “But you know, for her to assume that any white person is preening in front of her, feeling or trying to prove themselves superior . . . this is actually a pretty common accusation among blacks.”

    Yes, it is a common accusation among certain black people, specifically the NAACP and Pan African Departments of colleges and universities. And not just at whites but at anyone who disagrees with their platform. Conservative blacks “put on airs,” or “aren't working for their people, are “Uncle Toms” or “negroes” (via Zaki Baruti), etc. And if you want to tackle that topic (an awfully gutty move and one I would not suggest be broached without copious research), bringing up a USDA bureaucrat isn't the place to start.

    Besides Sherrod was laying charges against this specific man. Was he doing so? I don't know. But neither do you. Are you saying that white people never try to act superior to blacks? I can refute that idea as I've watched people interact with my wife. It does happen. I will not condemn her if I have no proof to the contrary. All that said, Sherrod is hardly a saint.

  12. “Surely you are not suggesting that racial bias is equivalent to murder… Are you then suggesting that people are unable to change their beliefs or to reform themselves?” Haha, actually, I was simply showing how, in rhetorical terms, the set up matters, even if the point is not that set up. That said, don't the leftie loons think that racism is worse than murder? Or at least comparable? (rhetorical questions, obviously)

    That superiority schtick is old and tired, and I don't have to see how that man acted–Sherrod herself said she was wrong. Indeed, the whole race thing is old and tired. People need to move the hell on from the past(yes, including you) and let that stuff go. We aren't paying reparations, we aren't going to suddenly cull every racist person, thought, or sentiment from every person, and we're certainly not going to move forward with people like Sherrod running around screaming “RAAAACIST” for no reason. That goes for the NBPP and NAACP, too. We can re-fight the Civil War every day, turn over rocks and read minds to locate racism, and pretend that race is all that matters about a person . . . OR we can move forward as one nation. Seems to me that no one is seriously interested in that. It's all about miring everything, every issue every person, in racial identity. Only racial identity. It makes me sick. (and obviously tangenty)

    Sherrod is already using this episode to hurl accusations of racism at Fox News–which did not air the story until AFTER she'd been fired. She's a race-baiter, and I believe she's dangerous (ideologically and now that the right is bending over backwards to accommodate her, despite what a Marxist racist she is).

  13. Re: sounds like 9/11 truthers…

    “Don't, however, try to shut down conversation with a leftist tactic–'sounds like 9/11 truthers' is not useful and is designed to close discussion (you know this). Not good.”

    The Left openly wondered if Bush II would step down following the election. The Left openly feared that Cheney would institute a military coup to keep himself in power. The Left openly claimed that Bush had the CIA destroy the WTC so that he could take away their civil rights, start a “profitable war” and destroy elections in this country. They continue to compare him to Hitler, compare conservatives and Middle America to the Brown Shirts (see Journolist). All of these accusations are baseless and ridiculous. I criticized them on these points I will not back away and not lay down the same criticism simply because the person is laying an accusation against a politician with whom I vehemently disagree.

    Pointing out the similarities between these conspiracy theories is hardly shutting down the conversation. If anyone has proof, or evidence of such plots then bring it forward and that would certainly make for an interesting and viable conversation. But idly speculating on race wars and such does not really accomplish much except raise alarmist fears at non-issues.

    The Left have been hyping Obama the savior and Dear Leader, but people aren't buying. Just look at the poll numbers. Dictators generally take power (assuming there isn't a civil war, guerrilla action, etc.) when there is widespread dissatisfaction (and not with the with those attempting to take power– see Honduras for an example of that) and with the consent of the few and because of the apathy and disinterest of the many. Obama has woken up the US citizens out of its complacency. If there ever had been a plan (and I would bet my wife, children, cats, house, and DVD collection that there never was) it could not now succeed without another civil war.

    There are plenty of things that could happen in this country that most people deny the possibility of. Personally, I fear a US nasty depression that would transform into a worldwide depression the likes of which no one has ever seen. The political shuffling that would follow that sort of upheaval would be unpredictable to say the least. I don't think this is likely, but its possible. Obama intentionally starting a race war so that he can suspend elections? Sounds like the Left and Bush.

  14. Re: Charges of Tea Party Leading to Race War

    “His media pets are doing all they can to paint the Tea Party as racists, including suggestions that we are violent–that's not a mistake. They know it's not true. So why push that narrative? To create love, peace, and understanding? I think not.”

    The MSM are infatuated with Obama, but not controlled by him. You point out the pushback against his attempt to descredit Fox. The current push against the Tea Party smacks of fear and desperation. Pulling the race card has worked against the Right in the past and rerouted the political conversation– though it won't here.

    So why do it? Because they are still convinced of their political sway and power. They did, after all, manage to enormously help put into office an unqualified Left radical with no experience nor qualification into the White House. This was a crowning achievement, but it opened the eyes of and stirred into action people like Andrew Breibart, Prof. Jacobson, the citizens who rallied at their reps' townhalls, and smaller bloggers like you and tiny bloggers like me who started their blogging and their political activities after Obama's election. The media does not see that they squandered their credibility by clearly backing Obama and are in denial. That is why they are doing this– and not to ignite a race war so Obama can declare martial law and suspend elections. They believe they can save the Dems.

    “We sort of know each other, and I love your mind and discussing things with you. In fact, I wanted to send you one of my posts for feedback/review before I posted to NRB (that's high praise, indeed!).”

    I'm flattered. And yeah, we do sort of know each other. I always enjoy your posts and my discussions with you.

  15. Well, you are right that the coup stuff is rather leftist on Bush stuff. Not sure that makes it untenable, but I do find food for thought in your discussion of how dictators take power when the populace is unhappy and/or detached. That's certainly true. And again you give me hope 🙂

    I'll be watching the Daily Caller to see if the Journolisters did discuss the possibility of intentionally stirring up racial tensions (the race war thing was my input, btw, not Betsi's–I'm the tinfoil hat-wearing loon on that one).

    Likewise. And by all means.

  16. Oops. You responded before I could up the other parts of my comment.

    You wrote: “That superiority schtick is old and tired, and I don't have to see how that man acted–Sherrod herself said she was wrong. Indeed, the whole race thing is old and tired. People need to move the hell on from the past(yes, including you) and let that stuff go. We aren't paying reparations, we aren't going to suddenly cull every racist person, thought, or sentiment from every person, and we're certainly not going to move forward with people like Sherrod running around screaming 'RAAAACIST' for no reason.”

    Hmm. I'm rather amused that you put me in the same category as people looking for reparations, the NBPP, and the NAACP. I don't see where I earned that. Is it because I've observed white people act superior around my wife, father-in-law, and mother-in-law? It happens, and ignoring it won't solve the problem or allow us to move forward as a nation.

    Plus, there is the very real political realities of race in politics. That “superiority schtick” you talk about is the prime motivation behind the Left's view and exploitation of minorities. Through their “mascot politics” and racial quotas– er… I mean afformative action– white liberals are essentially saying that minorities are not as good as whites, so we will gift them with our benevolence and prove how wonderful we are to help these poor, incapable, and inferior people. Yeach…

    Race is an issue in this country, simply suggesting that everyone simply move on is not really going to help. About a year ago, while strolling through downtown of my home town my wife and I were told by complete strangers that “God hates you!” in a drive-by shouting. My wife and I had a good laugh over this (and I'm not grubbing for sympathy), but the incident shows that leaving it all alone is not sufficient. Our mere presence offends a tiny minority of people (black & white) but simply “moving on” does not change this.

    I am not talking about govt. intervention to “cull racists,” and you chould know this. But as a society, closing our eyes and ignoring each other brought about Ron Paul (and his predicted race wars of the 1990s), Ron Karenga, Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, the current state of the NAACP, the NBPP, Rev. Wright, Pan African Studies Depts., etc.

    Heh. By all means…

  17. People are going to act superior, and it might not have anything to do with their race. They may think they're smarter than everyone, better looking, more talented, more skilled, taller, shorter, thinner, the list goes on forever. Heck, they may just think they're the messiah like BO does. It's not always about race is my point. It might be class, education (this we see ALL the time, no?), or simply someone's shoe choices. My point is that if you're going to berate me (perhaps rightly) for not knowing what someone is thinking, it's probably true that you don't know what others are thinking, either. One of my best friends dated this one guy for years, and she told me about he got all puffy about people staring at him/them, until she pointed out that he was wearing his shirt inside out. Crap happens. People stare. Some people even feel superior to people who can't dress themselves. :p So what?

    Race will ALWAYS be an issue not just in this country but in every country on the planet (as will class). Those crazies who shouted at you (my guess is that God isn't too pleased with them, either) will always exist, always feel and think whatever they want. Decent people don't associate them, but I don't want to control their thoughts or feelings, either. What on earth can be done to . . . what? not cull them? But what? Tiny little people with bigoted little brains exist in every walk of life and in every race–what's the solution?

  18. “What on earth can be done to . . . what? not cull them? But what? Tiny little people with bigoted little brains exist in every walk of life and in every race–what's the solution?”

    I'm not overly concerned about “tiny little people with bigoted little brains.” What concerns me are people like Ron Paul, Farrakhan, Pan African Studies Depts., etc. I hold no illusion to wiping all racism from the minds of every person in America, nor would I advocate instituting some nonsensical absolute equality or tit-for-tat social justice.

    The problem is miseducating people about a subject that has become taboo, “hands off” and “just get over it” in our society. When race and racial issues are not openly discussed you allow separatists, race hucksters, supremacists, and other assorted bigots to spew their nonsense unchallenged.

    When ideas go unchallenged, they have a nasty habit of worming their way into people's thoughts and impressions– witness the bile and misconceptions levelled at Sarah Palin that are viewed as absolute fact by people casually aware of the story. No proper challenge to Palin haters and we witness the result.

    Perhaps you heard of the Harvard Law School e-mail scandal? All of that nonsense could have easily been disspelled by a simple conversation with the law student. Instead, she remained ignorant and then was tarred as a racist.

    Willful ignorance and politely “just letting things be” allowed Ron Karenga and other Black Nationalists (who publicly call for blood to be spilled to form an African nation in America) to push the black nationalist/socialist nonsense of Kwanzaa into mainstream America. It allowed Karenga (convicted of holding against their will and torturing two young black women with, among other things, a soldering iron) to be the head of the Pan African Studies Dept. (or equivalently named department) at Cal State Long Beach until his recent retirement.

    This is wrong. And looking the other way allows this kind of violently worded nonsense to flourish.

    There seems to be an idea within the right that race realtions just improved naturally– like it was some social darwinian development or something. That does not stand up under even casual scrutiny. Race relations have been pretty miserable by our current standards for most of our nation's history. It's through concerted efforts through the late 1800s and into the 1920s, and again pushed again in the 1960s that race and gender relations improved. It didn't happen naturally, as the gap with Woodrow Wilson et al. demonstrate. What has been accomplished can be undone. Chinese history amply demonstrates this truth. I don't want progress to be undone by political oppotunists.

    You ask what the solution is. Michelle Malkin likes to say that sunlight is the best disinfectant. Exposing racialist nonsense for what it can and should open up people to actual debate and a real search for solutions and improvement.

    What's the solution? I don't know. But I know that starting to look for one means not writing it off, or telling people to just get over it already. That hasn't worked, ever.

  19. We talk about race every damn day it seems, Yukio. What “national conversation” are you talking about? What's the model for that?

    And I don't write race off, I think it's something that we need to tackle, but there is no dialogue possible between the leftists who think that everything is about race and the right who earnestly want equality (er, that's real equality, not forced quotas, no longer viable/useful affirmative action) but every time they propose anything that would upset the status quo, they get branded a 'racist.' No dialogue, no attempt to understand, just name-calling and declarations about how racist America is. I'm frankly sick to death of it all and becoming completely immune to any accusations of racism, even viable ones. I just don't give a damn anymore. The stupid word games (“reverse racism”?!), the crazy backassward logic (“black people can't be racist”), the insane clinging to failed policies that have more blacks (percentage-wise, not pure numbers) on welfare than were in the '60's and more black people living in poverty, getting crap educations–when they get one at all, and the whole damn lot of it. I shouldn't have to be fighting them to help them, but that's what it feels like. Suggesting that black people be given equal opportunity, a way to get a good education, good training for good jobs, is the equivalent–apparently–of being a big ol' racist who hates black people. I don't. But I am sick to death of fighting fighting fighting against ignorance, blind loyalty to the very people who are damaging them, and the stupid ingrained idea that pursuing the American Dream makes you a “race traitor” or an “Uncle Tom.” For God's sake, how do you combat that? What do you do? What's the magic phrase or argument to wake the black community from its self-destructive daze? Ugh. Groups like the NAACP and the followers of Jackson, Farrakan, and that ilk all say they want to achieve equality for black people, but when any black person attempts to work their way out of poverty, off the welfare rolls, these same people attack them for “selling out.” You can't win. They're self-defeating groups intent on keeping the status quo (and profiting handsomely from it, might I add). It's sick-making, and I'm “this close” to washing my hands of the whole thing. As an American, that makes me sad, but as a human being, I'm weary. I beat my head against the same wall, have the same arguments, and everything stays the same–at some point, you have to wonder why they work so hard to find racism in every little thing, to rebuff and and all attempts to bridge the racial divide, to essentially cling to inequality for all its worth.

    Sunlight? Discussion? Jesus, any more sunlight, and we'd all fry. Any more discussion, and we'd all be hoarse. We talk about race ad nauseum. To no avail.

  20. @yukio
    Thanks for pointing out the errors in my thinking, I feel so much better now! You be sure to let me know when I'm allowed to worry. In the future, I'll also try to remember to run all blog comments by you for your approval.

  21. @ Fuzzy

    When I have used the term “national conversation”– which you put in quotes?

    What I'm describing are trends and changes that have developed (I will not say evolved because of the social dariwnism implications) over the course of more than a century of history. This didn't happen because a few people got together in a conference room and hashed out their differences every few decades.

    Your comment suggests that I think of American race issues as binary opposition (Left vs. Right, Black vs. White, Limbaugh vs Farrakhan or something). I don't believe that, and I don't believe I suggested that anywhere. If I did, I'm sorry, my bad. Standing up to racial bullies and working against racial separatism does not necessarily make the issue a two-sided thing.

    “Any more discussion, and we'd all be hoarse. We talk about race ad nauseum.”

    Not really. We are instead subjected to finger-wagging lectures by people like Ben Jealous, Rev. Wright, Karenga, Gates, Jackson, Spike Jones, etc. All people who make money off of widening a racial divide. This is not a discussion or conversation. However, understanding them is important in the same way that understanding Marxism and Fascism is important.

    And understand who you are trying to convince. Not Farrakhan et al. Their jobs and political relevancy depend on prolonging racial issues. You're not trying to simply convince black Americans, as this not merely a “black issue.”

    You seem frustrated. “We talk about race ad nauseum. To no avail.”

    Yes. I certainly understand that. I've been called racist more times than I can count– and I can count pretty high, you know fingers AND toes. But there is progress. This year more black candidates are running for Congress on the Republican ticket since Reconstruction. More and more conservative black bloggers, pundits, and activists are coming out of the woodwork. The Congressional Black Caucus is losing mainstream credibility. The NAACP is being exposed for what's it become and the the label is losing its value. I personally see a definite change in the black community as discussions have opened up on issues that were thought of to be basic, unquestionable truths within the black community a few years before (truths like “pursuing the American Dream makes you a race traitor or an Uncle Tom,” for instance). The conformity demanded by the concept of “black community” is crumbling. This is one of the reasons the NAACP wheeled out Zaruti to talk about Gladney “not working for his people,” and it's one of the reasons they're labeling the Tea Party as racist– to prevent blacks from leaving their banner.

    You say you're “sick of fighting.” That's too bad, because it's likely that we're on the cusp of significant, positive change.

    “Jesus, any more sunlight, and we'd all fry.”

    Not true at all. You “wonder why they work so hard to find racism in every little thing, to rebuff and and all attempts to bridge the racial divide, to essentially cling to inequality for all its worth.” There are likely answers to this explored by Shelby Steele (whom I know you've read) and John McWorter, among others.

    Perhaps I used Malkin's metaphor incorrectly. My bad. What I meant by sunlight is understanding your opponents' argument and POV (not agreeing nor sympathizing, but understanding), why things are happening, and having situational awareness of the issue. I don't see too many people frying in the sunlight.

  22. @ Betsi Rauss

    You write:

    “Thanks for pointing out the errors in my thinking, I feel so much better now! You be sure to let me know when I'm allowed to worry. In the future, I'll also try to remember to run all blog comments by you for your approval.”

    Please explain to me how pointing out that your concerns mirror those of the far Left's concerns about George W. Bush disallows you from worrying.

    If your concern were based on anything valid you would have evidence and be able to refute me, or at least you wouldn't let that small comment (“This sounds like 9/11 truthers. Please…”) somehow disallow all your worries.

    Instead of responding to my comment, you merely paint me as the bad guy intent on stifling your voice (by disagreeing with you) while at the same time indulging in (possibly) feigned victimized outrage. This is to shame me into silence so that I will no longer voice my mean and callous disagreements with your opinion– somewhat ironic since you're accusing me of attempting me to stifle your voice and opinion (which I was not doing, BTW).

    Do you really think I haven't encountered this strategy before? I normally argue with Leftists and often black Leftists, well-versed in victimology strategy.

    So yes, what a horrible person I am for having the temerity to disagree with your view that Obama intends to contrive to wipe away elections in this country and install himself as a dictator.

    Yes, it is very true that you do not need my permission, nor anyone else's permission (except Fuzzy of course), to leave a comment. But if you leave a comment on a mainly political blog, you may encounter someone who disagrees with your opinion or POV. I'm sorry that offends you, but I do not apologize for disagreeing with you.

  23. Yukio, on the one hand, your sunshiny (heh) view of matters if actually very hope-inspiring, but I have to say that on the other hand, it seems a tad . . . not “naive” (hardly a word I associate with you), I don't know, maybe “rootlessly optimistic”?

    “I personally see a definite change in the black community as discussions have opened up on issues that were thought of to be basic, unquestionable truths within the black community a few years before (truths like “pursuing the American Dream makes you a race traitor or an Uncle Tom,” for instance). The conformity demanded by the concept of “black community” is crumbling. This is one of the reasons the NAACP wheeled out Zaruti to talk about Gladney “not working for his people,” and it's one of the reasons they're labeling the Tea Party as racist– to prevent blacks from leaving their banner.”

    Where do you see a change? The NAACP was indeed only recently (last month?) condemning Gladney as an “Uncle Tom,” somehow not black enough to warrant their defense. He was beaten, called a “nigger” repeatedly, and it was all caught on videotape. This was, if ever there was, a hate crime. A federal offense. WHERE is the outrage from the black community? Where are the calls for justice? Actual justice? Honestly, I don't see how you can use that as an example of growth or enlightenment. This isn't a new strategy to keep blacks who are bursting to leave their banner from doing so–it's the same old thing, and has the same old effect. Twitter was hopping with blacks condemning Gladney as a race traitor, sell out, Uncle Tom, you name it. Whatever the NAACP is selling, people are buying. En masse.

    I'd love to think, to believe, that we really are on the cusp of significant change, but I don't see it. I think that we, on the right, are certainly more vocal about our views on equality (real equality, not faux equality in the form of racist “social justice”) and in pushing back against accusations of RAAAACISM, but that's not touching, at all, the left. It breaks my heart that so many people are so willing (even happy) to damn, or “god damn,” America and Americans, to seek out and triumphantly pounce on any and everything as a display of racism. That we are more divided now than ever before. That we can watch a man call for the murder of white babies on television. Now. In 2010. That's 1960's stuff that we'd never ever see only five years ago make it to the mainstream. Is that, to your view, a sign that it's on its last leg, that last hard push before it is finally beaten back once and for all? God, I hope so.

  24. @ Yukio, And a note on Betsi–she's not at all responding to your disagreeing with her, more the tone and way in which you did it. Her view, after all, is perfectly valid (and even if it weren't . . . ). Hell, I don't think I've had a peaceful night's sleep in over a year. I worry constantly about this administration, about the way that it targets white people and anyone who opposes their policies . . . I've not felt safe in my own country in a good long while. For the first time in my entire life, actually. And there is reason to fear. Flag the “fishy,” the DHS memo to police on right wing “extremists” (this includes supporters of states rights, anyone–even those not affiliated with any rightwing group–who is pro-life, and even military vets!), the various restrictions to our liberties that don't make headlines (attacks on privacy, communication, the internet), the open and obvious attempts to shut down “opposition” media, the constant attacks from this president against Americans just like me, the obvious racial bias that this AG thinks acceptable (cherry picking laws to enforce, turning a blind eye to some law breakers and actively pursuing others who break the same law, reports of actual declarations that white victims of crimes by black people will not be allowed to seek justice through our legal system), and on and on. This administration is openly hostile to people just like me and Betsi, but I do think you make a good point that these moves haven't been met with the enthusiasm and support that they thought they would be. People were outraged at the “flag the fishy” campaign, pushed back when they tried to discredit Fox, and have made it clear that going after conservatives just because they are conservatives will not work. But it doesn't stop them from trying. BO is STILL trying to push Huff-Po as “valid” and Fox as invalid, still asserting (wildly) that information is dangerous, still sneering at conservatives and trying as hard as ever to marginalize us as “terrorists.” That's fact, and it's ongoing.

    It's not at all strange to imagine that BO will not willingly relinquish his power. I've been publicly saying this for well over a year now, and you can disagree all you want (heh, and do every time I say it), but there are ways to do that without being flip and dismissive (look who's talking, right? I'm the queen of flip and dismissive. I do see the irony here, but am clicking “post comment” anyway. :p).

  25. First off, when I talk about race issues I didn't mean exclusively black/white race issues. That's what this discussion has sort of turned into, but that's not what I meant 2 or 3 comments ago.

    That said, don't look for an avalanche of change immediately. The NAACP is losing their sway– that's exactly why they're shaming people into staying loyal with name calling, that's one reason why they are attacking the Tea Party as racist– to keep black Americans from learning about it, to especially keep them out of it and loyal to the NAACP (incidentally this is the same tactic Chris Matthews used in his “documentary” about the new, “emerging” right– scare people so they will dismiss them and not look at what they actually represent). Indeed, this is the same tactic Pelosi used when dealing with the townhall meetings– remember when she was calling them angry nazis etc. It is a tactic that is desperate. The fact that the NAACP is currently using it so frequently speaks volumes.

    “This isn't a new strategy to keep blacks who are bursting to leave their banner from doing so–it's the same old thing, and has the same old effect.”

    You're partially right. It's not a new tactic. It is the sudden urgency and frequency (tweets as evidence) of it that is telling– not the tactic itself. Attacking a major political movement (the Tea Party) as racist is definitely new.

    Prior to Gladney and even Obama, I knew of many people within the black community questioning the purpose of the NAACP. When the NAACP ratcheted up the pressure, the result has been greater polarization– forcing people to take sides within the community– again forcing the heightened rhetoric. This has been alleviated somewhat by the firing of Sherrod, a happy coincidence for the NAACP.

    Don't put too much stock in twitter. The NAACP, Media Matters, etc. hire people to put up multiple accounts and tweet the party line. This is not unlike when movie studios hire people or have their interns go on Yahoo (and other places) and put up favorable user reviews of movies. Go to facebook, websites, and chatrooms where trolls and shills are easier to spot because they have more characters to work with and must interact.

    The fact that so many black Americans are running for Congress under the Repub. banner is significant and I don't think it's based in “rootless optimism.” Michael Steele as head of the RNC– not such a great sign.

    “That we are more divided now than ever before.”

    Nonsense. Even assuming that you're talking about after the Civil Rights Act and desegregation (not so long ago, my father-in-law went to a segregated high school), this is demonstrably false. Mixed marriages are on the rise in the US and quite common, as I have blogged about before. Mixed communities are the norm. American ethnic minorities can be found working in any conceivable profession– including president of the U.S. In fact, this is so common and mainstream that it is ridiculous for me to even mention it or make a list.

    (Cont.)

  26. “That we can watch a man call for the murder of white babies on television. Now. In 2010. That's 1960's stuff that we'd never ever see only five years ago make it to the mainstream.”

    We're seeing that now only because of the DOJ's reprehensible decision to not go after the obvious voter intimidation. Do you think this is new rhetoric? There's nothing new to it at all. Black nationalists have been spewing calls for violence since the 1960s. There was little lull and no stop of it. The Official Kwanzaa website calls for blood to be spilled– this site has said this for many years. It is not a new addition. The black nationalist flag (black, green, and red bars) has been described as “black for the color of our skins, green for the land that was taken from us, red for the blood that must be spilled for us to reclaim it” (this is on the Kwanzaa website among many other allied black nationalist websites). It's nothing new– and most people in the black community disregard and ignore it.

    You wonder why people “seek out and triumphantly pounce on any and everything as a display of racism.” Read Shelby Steele and John McWorter regarding “the cult of victimology” and “keeping white people on the hook.” I don't agree with everything they have to say, but their analyses are very intresting.

    We're in the midst of social change, that is clear. What the results will be remains to be seen. With the NAACP and other black community leaders and the Left cranking up both the frequency and the heat of the rhetoric, there will of course be polarization. That's the point of it. The Right and many whites in America have not taken the bait and aren't cranking out racist rhetoric. This is not surprising (can you imagine what the response would've been in the '70s?), but for Leftists this is shocking. Look at Journolist they believe almost all people on the Right are warmongering, evil, racists.

    Re: Betsi

    I made one comment –This sounds like 9/11 truthers. Please…– which I cont. to stand by. Then she directs a sarcastic comment at me where she plays the victim card while basically calling me an asshole for disagreeing with her.

    This kind of thing doesn't offend me (otherwise I'd be continuously offended), but in person I don't let that go without comment, on blogs usually not.

    About the issue itself, what do you expect from a hard Leftist like Obama? Of course he is going to criticize the media and attempt to control it. This is a classic update of Marxist strategy. The fact that it failed and continues to fail is significant and not surprising.

    “This administration is openly hostile to people just like me and Betsi” And not me?

  27. heh, we are all over the place, that's good (with most people, I lose interest in long, drawn-out, sometimes off-topic discussions). Anyway, yes, I think that I've fallen into that trap of black vs. white as if those are the only two races in the world or in America. My bad there.

    You are definitely on this admin's “hit list,” though. Should have included you 🙂

    I just hope you're right about things changing. I can see what you are saying, and even accept much of it (the social change point is a good one and true, for instance, and your “Nonsense.” made me smile. You're right there, too), but there still seems an almost invisible but insurmountable barrier. Maybe it's just the last gasps. I hope so. We should get you cloned so you can give me pep talks when I get all despairing.

What say you?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s