Tag Archive for 'racism'

Lazy holiday news round up

Interesting news items that don’t inspire a full post.

The health benefits of 20 herbs you should be adding to your food.

HIV attacks healthy tissue, not open wounds and sores on skin, changing the understanding of person-to-person transmission

Crying isn’t cathartic for everyone — life coaches take note!

Whites shooting blacks with impunity in days following Hurricaine Katrina (long The Nation feature, worth a read); police finally decide it might be worth investigating — go figure.

After beating up a 12-year old black girl, putting her in the hospital (and insisiting she was a prostitute because she wore tight shorts), police arrest her for defending herself from the officers

State Department recommends not renewing Blackwater (aka the private mercenary force that operates above the law in Iraq) contracts

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

VOD: Donna Brazile on race & the Presidential election

This video of Democratic strategist Donna Brazile is making the rounds.  She offer a personal anecdote about growing up in the once segregated South and asks that people vote on issues and the political agendas of each candidate, not on the color of his skin.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Following up: McCain and Palin fueling the fires

Last night as I wrote about recent incidents on the campaign trail, I wondered if perhaps I was over reaching in my conclusions that McCain and Palin would be complicit in any act of violence perpetrated against Obama  before (or frankly, after) the election.  They hear what their supporters are saying. . . . “Terrorist” . . . “Kill him!” . . . “Treason!”

Today, I’m disappointed, but not surprised, to find much of the blogosphere that I follow is writing in the same vein.   McCain and Palin are essentially inciting a lynch mob by reinforcing and reiterating and emphasizing that Obama is different and Obama is the Other.  They stretch weak connections to be able to say Obama is cavorting with terrorist, when McCain and Palin have more direct ties to terrorism themselves.

Baratunde Thurston of Jack & Jill politics has reached the same conclusions (emphasis mine):

But the current political environment does not excuse remaining silent when a candidate for president is referred to as a “terrorist” in your presence. A desire to win does not excuse remaining silent during a threat on the life of a U.S. Senator at one of your rallies. There are no excuses for evil such as this. John McCain and Sarah Palin, the GOP and all who support them have lost all rights to legitimate argument. They are liars. They are wrong. They are evil. Yes, evil. They are one small step short of inciting violence at their rallies. They are letting physical threats go unchallenged.

I was at Obama’s rally at Independence Square in Philadelphia back in April. When he mentioned Hillary Clinton’s name, the crowd booed, and he told them to stop. Barack Obama intervened when his supporters booed his opponent. He called for civility. Yet, when faced with supporters who label senators terrorists and call for their assassination, John McCain and Sarah Palin said nothing.

This is how evil spreads, from domestic violence to genocide. People in a position to stop it choose to do nothing.

And when zealots shouts “Terrorist” . . . “Kill him!” . . . “Treason!,” McPalin chooses to hear no evil.   They refuse to draw a line in the sand for their supporters, because they’re providing the fodder that leads some unhinged individuals to those dangerous conclusions.  The finish line is so close, and if they can push just a bit harder in the last lap. . .

There’s an unattributed saying, “Character is what you are in the dark.”  We are seeing dark days in the month leading up to the November election.  An election that is set to turn the page on 8 years of administration that daftly and proudly ushered forth America’s decline in the world and under whose watch created the perfect economic storm hailing down upon us. In November we can choose to continue the decline or begin the slow process of rebuilding our nation and its standing in the world.

UPDATE 10/10: The crowds that attend McPalin events are growing more vitriolic by the day.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Be wary of the consequences when riling up the base

The people “have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge– I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.”

John Adams (1735-1826)

McCain and Palin are in attack mode; it’s all they have left.  The coveted female and undecided voters are increasingly falling line behind Democrats and supporting Obama.

The economic meltdown is spreading overseas, leaving McCain unable to “turn the page,” since the American voters want answers not dodging of the issues.

The farce of McCain’s campaign suspension is still fresh in voters’ minds as they consider the true cost of that bail out.  Sen. McCain left the trail, but left all his campaign offices open and active and left Palin to rally, to return to DC and become a leader on the bail out. And 2/3 of Republicans voted against the bill he encouraged them to support, while 2/3 of Democrats swallowed bad medicine and voted yay.   The bill that ultimate passed only did so because it was gift wrapped in the kind of pork spending McCain has spent months railing against on the campaign trail.  After voting for it, he encouraged Bush to veto it.

His path to the White House grows more improbable by the day.  Even Karl Rove admits Obama would win in a landslide if the election were held today. On the economy, McCain has been given a failing grade by voters. Realizing the American people won’t take their insurance dollars being taxed, McCain now hopes to slash Medicaid and Medicare to pay for his health care program.  (Is this new suggestion a subtle admission that McCain is pulling out of Florida as well?)

I’m reminded of that line from A Knight’s Tale when Adhemar looks down at Thatcher early in the film after besting him, saying, “You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?”

In what world could McCain beat Obama? Based on McCain-Palin campaigning stops, they’re counting on Bridge to the Yesterday filled with Racism and Fearmongering.  They seem to be taking their inspiration from Shakesville’s Obama Racism/Muslim/Unpatriotic/Scary Dude Watch 2008.

In recent weeks, bloggers and journalists have interpreted what could be slight racist undertones to McCain ads, from “Advice” trying to tie Obama to non-advisor Raines to “Perverse” claiming Obama wants kindergardeners taught comprehensive sex education.

Today in New Mexico McCain asked “who is the real Barack Obama?” One member of the audience shouted “a terrorist,” much to the surprise of even McCain, who, after recovering from the surprise of that shout out, seemed quite willing to work with that conclusion as he continued speaking.

This weekend Palin pulled out the Ayers card, a link so weak it did not work when applied by Hillary Clinton, but rabid conservatives continue to shout it from the mountaintops. Ayers is an unrepentant former member of the Weather Underground (never prosecuted) and a University of Illinois professor who works on education reform. They served on the board of the same non-profit dedicated to education reform in Chicago.

“Now it turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man named Bill Ayers,” Palin said.

“Boooo!” said the crowd.

“And, according to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, ‘launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,’” she continued.

“Boooo!” the crowd repeated.

“Kill him!” proposed one man in the audience.

Palin went on to say that . . . “I am just so fearful that this is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America, as the greatest force for good in the world. I’m afraid this is someone who sees America as ‘imperfect enough’ to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country.”

McCain and Palin are now indirectly driving home the idea that Obama is different.  He’s not like you and me.  He hangs out with terrorists, and surprise! He’s not a white dude.   Obama predicted as much. . .

“Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me,” Obama said. “You know, ‘He’s not patriotic enough, he’s got a funny name,’ you know, ‘He doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.’”

This same type of verbiage is now used full force by the McCain-Palin campaign daily.  The very verbiage they decried just 2 months ago.

McCain took on the role of aggrieved victim, his campaign waiting almost a day after Obama’s remarks to charge that he had injected race into the presidential campaign. “Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It’s divisive, negative, shameful and wrong,” McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said.

Yes, that same “divisive, negative, shameful and wrong” language rallies the base, and while it also reach the few left on the fence, it’s unlikely to reverse the course of this election season.

Are they prepared to face the potentially more devestating consequences of branding the opposing candidate for President as different, an outsider, a terrorist?

In July, a man opened fire during a “children’s musical performance” at a Knoxville Unitarian church, killing 2 congregants and wounding 7 others.

Jim David Adkisson told investigators all liberals should be killed and admitted he shot people Sunday morning at Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church . . .

According to the affidavit requesting to search Adkisson’s home, the suspect told investigators liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country. Adkisson also blamed Democrats for the country’s decline, according to the affidavit.

A huge uproar ensued following Jenna Kern Rugile’s column, “Does shock jock hate speech lead to violence?” in which she asked where this man might have picked up his ideas.

Might the shooter have heard talk-show host Rush Limbaugh say that “liberalism is the greatest threat this country faces” and “the Islamofascists are actually campaigning for the election of Democrats” and that riots at the Democratic Convention would be “the best damn thing that can happen to this country.”

Might the shooter have heard talk-show host Sean Hannity say in 2006, “There are things in life worth fighting and dying for, and one of them is making sure Nancy Pelosi doesn’t become the speaker.”

Addison owned a number of books with anti-liberal messaging written by conservative talking heads O’Reilly, Hannity, and Savage.  Surely, those books influenced his mind set and actions before whatever break down lead him to enter a church hoping to go down in a blaze of gunfire?

And here is the Republican ticket campaigning by trying to tar Obama as a terrorist-friendly predator with his eye on our innocent children and our defenseless old ladies.  He’s the candidate with a Muslim-sounding middle name (Hussein). He’s the candidate that’s different. These are the words the conservative base, the Republican zealots, take to heart at rally after rally.

In the event of an attempt made on Obama’s life by a wing nut spewing the same yarns told day after day by McCain, Palin, and their surrogates, would they own up to their contribution in riling up a criminal?  Me thinks not.

You saw that OMG moment for McCain in New Mexico, when he realized how extreme some of his supporters are in their blind hatred of Obama.  It’s as though he just realized that the friendly, de-regulation loving Republican isn’t the only one writing checks to the McCain campaign.

Back in May, Cindy McCain swore her husband would run a clean campaign.

Mrs. McCain said that the upcoming campaign against either Sen. Barack Obama or Sen. Hillary Clinton would not engage in negative tactics.

“We’d rather not win than to have to do that,” Mrs. McCain said. “That’s not worth winning for. This is about being a leader and a person that can be a good example for our children, and a good role model. There’s many, many, many more things to this job than just being the president. You are an example. You have to — you have to be better than that. You have to be.”

Sen. McCain also repeatedly called for clean campaigning.

What a difference a few months and the unbridled hunger for power make.  The campaign’s embrace of the rankest of muck and insinuation speaks volumes about the campaign’s leadership and the character of its candidates. They now stir the same kettle that the Limbaughs and Hannities of this country toil over.

At what price an American presidency?

UPDATE: For my follow up post, see McCain and Palin fueling the fires.

UPDATE 10/8: At McPalin rally today: “Off with his head.”

UPDATE 10/10: Video of Obama’s prediction in July that the current GOP tactics were inevitable


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Tim Wise: This is Your Nation On White Privilege

Jill over at Writes Like She Talks recommends that bloggers “spread Tim Wise’s article, ‘This is Your Nation on White Privilege,’ far and wide.”

I’m happy to help the cause.

This election season has demonstrated the profound double standards in our country in regards to gendered personality traits, qualifications, character, and experience.  Obama’s March speech on race is just the tip of the ice berg in terms of conversations that need to be had about how our race defines us and what privileges and challenges our genetic makeup hands us.

Whether or not you plan to vote for Barack Obama in November, we need to acknowledge that all Americans aren’t equal, yet.  The repeated and prolonged attacks on Barack Obama throughout the primary and general election periods are not just about politics.  Every challenge made of Sarah Palin’s qualifications can’t simply be written off as sexism and sour grapes over a personable Phyllis Schlafly 2.0.

There’s this false notion that nearly 150 years after slavery was outlawed in America, that race is no longer an issue.  Throughout the country ballot wars are raged against the continuation of affirmative action in employment and education systems.  People insist that the sins of their fathers, are not their own.    Sadly, the civil rights movement of the 1960s shifted our culture some, but not enough.

Here are a few of  Tim Wise’s observations on white privilege:

For those who still can’t grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.

White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don’t all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you’re “untested.”

…White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was “Alaska first,” and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you’re black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she’s being disrespectful.

Click through for the full piece. Your thoughts?  Pass it on.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Obama and McCain, does VP selection matter?

photo by luanaveloso

Does VP selection matter in 2008? Or will it remain a race that focuses on the McCain’s attempts to derail the Good Ship Obama?

The Obama campaign has been very tight lipped about who it’s vetting for the VP slot.  The odds are most definitely not in favor of Hillary Clinton, and stray supporters still fume at the notion that another woman could be Obama’s running mate, despite several viable candidates that mesh well with Obama’s platforms.  (It begs the question, how effective were 18 million cracks  in the illusive glass ceiling for women in politics, if only women named Hillary Clinton are allowed to benefit from those cracks?).  Additionally, the recent announcement of the Democratic National Convention program including the VP candidate as a speaker on the night dedicated to veterans and “securing America’s future” leads some to suspect Gen. Wesley Clark or others, like Joe Biden, who have either military or foreign affairs experience could be #2.

For background, a recent AP-Ipsos poll shows Obama besting McCain with women, minority, and young voters.

Obama leads by 13 points among women, by 30 points among voters up to age 34, and by 55 points among blacks, Hispanics and other minorities, the poll shows.

Would picking a seasoned, white male make a difference with older, white Americans?

Where he’s lagging is among white voters, and with older ones in particular. Call me crazy, but isn’t it possible, just possible, that Obama’s lead is being inhibited by the fact that he is, you know, black? “Of course it is,” says another prominent Republican operative. “It’s the thing that nobody wants to talk about, but it’s obviously a huge factor.” . . .

In a number of key swing states, the percentage of voters who backed Clinton and who said that “the race of the candidates” was “important” in their decision was alarmingly high: in New Jersey, 9; in Ohio and Pennsylvania, more than 11. The writer John Judis reckons, therefore, that in the general election (where the voting population is markedly less liberal than in the primaries) in those states, “15 to 20 percent of Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents may not support [Obama] for the same reason.”

Would those who found race to be an issue in the primaries, be comforted by the sight of the typical, patriarchal, white male campaigning side-by-side with Obama until November, enough to mitigate the race factor for an Election mopping? Are we really having this conversation in 2008?

And since Obama is forced to put out the name of his VP candidate first, could McCain’s choice sway voters?  McCain is probably going to pick a younger (anyone will be younger than McCain) male Republican. Would a pairing with Lieberman help claims of maverick bipartisan effort, or just piss off independents who’ve watched a Democrat-turned-Independent-caucasing-with Democrats become one of the fiercest critics of every statement made by Obama? Regardless, if Obama wins and Democrats take back their leads in legislature, Lieberman will likely be booted from his leadership roles within Senate and be turned over the Republicans.

Alternately, the media would like us to believe that Hillary’s PUMAs are a sizable group that will potentially sway the election, though Pew Research shows Democratic women overall have only shown a slight dip in support for the presumed Democratic nominee compared to recent elections.  Could a female VP pick by McCain shift females tied to Obama and independent votesr? Or would it just be seen as the latest attempt at pandering by the candidates?

Even though Alaska’s Governor Sarah Palin is  currently involved in some frackas about using her office to seek retribution against her former brother-in-law and she gave two thumbs up to Obama’s energy policy, she’s an incredibly popular Republican Governor in her home state. And former HP executive Carly Fiorina has been stumping for McCain for months.

Would a white running mate for Obama and a female one for McCain negate any gains either candidate received as a result?

Though it seems completely absurd, could race or gender be a deciding factor in a Presidential election, which holds real world consequences for the nation and the world?  I ask because of a recent study released entitled: The Role of Celebrity Endorsements in Politics: Oprah, Obama, and the 2008 Democratic Primary.

we use geographic differences in subscriptions to O! – The Oprah Magazine and the sale of books Winfrey recommended as part of Oprah’s Book Club to assess whether her endorsement affected the Primary outcomes.  We find her endorsement had a positive effect on the votes Obama received, increased the overall voter participation rate, and increased the number of contributions received by Obama . . .Our results suggest that Winfrey’s endorsement was responsible for approximately 1,000,000 additional votes for Obama.

If a celebrity endorsement can yield 1 million votes for Obama, shouldn’t the weightier issues of gender discrimination and racism have an effect in the voting booth as well, even if we’re less likely to admit to those charges?

PS. If you’re eager to be one of the first to know who Obama picks, you can sign up for text message updates via the Obama campaign.  Supporters who provide their cell phone numbers will be the first notified.

To my knowledge, the McCain camp is not offering the same service.   Anyone?

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Racism lives on: A Girl Like Me

Dan Heath, author of Made to Stick, posted this Kiri Davis video to his blog today.

The recommended moment (from 3:20-5:00 on the video) just breaks your heart.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button