Red America, White Power

Is the Tea Party movement motivated by race hatred?

On November 9, 1938, in the Tyrolian city of Innsbruck, Richard Berger, president of the local Jewish community, was snatched from his home and beaten to death with rocks and rifle butts, his body deposited in a nearby river. On the same evening, in an apartment building on Gänsbacherstrasse, Karl Bauer, of whom little is known besides his religious affiliation and his activities on behalf of Innsbruck's Jewish community, was beaten to death by plainclothes members of the SS. The vulturine horde moved swiftly upstairs, where they found the Volksfeind Richard Graubart, also Jewish. He was stabbed to death as his wife and daughter looked on.

This is a small window into the wanton brutality that was Reichskristallnacht—often called the "Night of Broken Glass"—in a medium-sized Austrian city. A contemporaneous report compiled in Berlin and presided over by the gruesome SS butcher Reinhard Heydrich estimated that 36 Jews were killed across the German Reich. It was, as historian Saul Friedländer has observed, a rather conservative guess: "Apart from the 267 synagogues destroyed and the 7,500 businessees vandalized, some ninety one Jews had been killed all over Germany and hundreds more had committed suicide or died as a result of mistreatment in the camps."

Would you be surprised to learn that a similar spasm of violence was recently visited upon African-American politicians in Washington, D.C.? Well, credulous reader, The New York Times recently told us that the shock troops of the Tea Party movement engaged in a "small-scale mimicry of Kristallnacht" while protesting the passage of a treasury-busting health care bill.

This bizarre invocation of genocide was to be found on the op-ed page, from the hysterical ex-theater critic and Tea Party obsessive Frank Rich. Whether or not Rich is aware of it—and when one ascends to the position of New York Times columnist, ignorance is an unconvincing excuse—it is to mass killings that the reader's mind wanders when the 20th century's most famous pogrom is invoked. In a book of essays analyzing the events of 1938, the scholar Walter H. Pehle's chosen title lays down the marker: The Jewish Pogrom: From Kristallnacht to Genocide (Der Judenpogrom: Von der "Reichskristallnacht" zum Völkermord). The anti-Semitic attacks, "spontaneously" carried out "in reaction" to the murder of a Nazi diplomat, were the beginnings of a program of systematic genocide. Surely Rich, a professional writer his entire adult life, understands that the English language is abundant enough to allow for nuance and precision.

No one was stabbed this March, no limp bodies dumped into the Anacostia River, no buildings burned. A few lunkheads broke windows (and if this is enough to provoke comparisons to Kristallnacht, the anti-globalization crowd must be the protest equivalent of the Einsatzgruppen) and one unidentified protester called Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) a "faggot," for which he was rebuked by fellow protesters. Despite gleeful recitation by the media, claims of racial taunts directed at African-American congressmen have yet to be substantiated—but more on that in a moment.

One stray columnist comparing the rowdy Tea Party crowds to German genocidaires could perhaps be explained away. An inattentive editor, a moment of regretful anger seeping into the prose. But to Rich's colleague Paul Krugman, the hyperpartisan economist and Nobel Prize winner, the Nazi comparison was a useful one, although it did demand subtlety. “What has been really striking," Krugman wrote after the health care bill passed, "has been the eliminationist rhetoric of the G.O.P., coming not from some radical fringe but from the party’s leaders" (emphasis added).

If your dictionary is unfamiliar with the word eliminationist, that's because of the term's recent vintage, coined in 1996 by Harvard political scientist Daniel Jonah Goldhagen. In his book Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, Goldhagen argued that far from being bullied and terrorized into allowing its government to commit genocide in their name, most Germans were imbued with an eliminationist hatred of Jews—i.e., a desire that Jews be eliminated from Aryan society—which transitioned smoothly into an exterminationist orgy of violence.

Of the 40 references to "eliminationism" in the Times archive, all but one refer to the destruction of European Jewry. The sole standout is Krugman, who, as we have seen, is referencing the Republican Party's opposition to health care legislation. (Though in fairness to Krugman, this is something of a requirement for those anointed by the Nobel Committee. Nobelist Harold Pinter said that the only comparison one could make to Bush-era America was to that of Nazi Germany.)

Moving downmarket to the New York Daily News, one finds a column by sports columnist Mike Lupica declaring that the crowds of health care protesters are "no longer about political dissent. It is about storm trooper sound bites, and hate." It is unclear what a "storm trooper soundbite" is (or why this would be incompatible with "political dissent," no matter how noxious), though Lupica is unambiguously guiding readers towards the Nazi image; towards the brown-shirted tough rounding up dissidents, cracking jaws, and kicking teeth.

Examining the Tea Party protesters, Washington Post columnist Colbert King saw faces whose very visual cues betrayed direct lineage to overt racists from a half-century before. "Those same jeering faces," King wrote, "could be seen gathered around the Arkansas National Guard troopers who blocked nine black children from entering Little Rock's Central High School in 1957." If the examples of Alabama and Mississippi in the 1950s were too distant, King told readers that he had also seen those very faces in the 1990s, at a rally in support of neo-Nazi agitator David Duke.

It is depressing that, for quick political gain, people like King will debase the legacy of the civil rights movement by comparing peaceful (and often misguided) protesters with the thuggery of Bull Connor and the racist Birmingham police department. But just when it looked like we had scraped the bottom of the hyperbole barrel, the always vapid Jesse Jackson told the breast-obsessed readers of Huffington Post that the Tea Partiers reminded him of an era when some Americans responded to social change "with terror, bombed churches, and killed freedom marchers."

Many referenced the claim that Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) was, in Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) description, met with a "chorus," of racist taunts, though no evidence has materialized to substantiate these accusations—and the alleged chorus occurred in an area with a higher video camera density than a Paris Hilton birthday party. Indeed, claims the Cleaver was spat upon were debunked when video surfaced of a spittle-flecked protester shouted "kill the bill" as the congressman passed, but not deliberately hocking a loogie on him.

So if the events on Capital Hill were indeed the moral equivalent of a "mini-Kristallnacht," then questioning this tale of racism is a David Irving-like act, right? Those who wondered about the contradicting claims surrounding the Lewis charge were, naturally, themselves derided as racist. But if the country's largest newspapers can accuse those assembled to "kill the bill" of being motivated by racial animus, "eliminationism," Nazism, or old Dixie nostalgia, is it so unfair to ask for verifiable proof?

It isn't unreasonable to think that amongst the Tea Party protesters one can find the ignorant and hateful. Many of the protesters seem to believe that the president of the United States of America is a communist, demonstrating that they have a level of historical understanding on par with Frank Rich. But that critique is something rather different than imputing a racist motivation to anyone deeply concerned about an enormously expensive health care bill.

Some of this is the problem of now, of rendering apocalyptic judgments about events that are only just unfolding. In the weeks following the 9/11 attacks, Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter declared solemnly and with regret that irony had vanished in the smoke and embers of the demolished World Trade Center, a judgment that seemed plausible at the time. Rereading some of the commentary produced in the aftermath of the attacks is like looking at old high school yearbook photos—good god, what were we thinking? Likewise, a journalist who chased Bill Clinton scandals for a conservative magazine in the 1990s recently told me how silly it all seemed with the clarifying benefit of hindsight. At the time, he said, it all seemed so reasonable.

And while we are on the topic of 9/11, how quickly we forget that in the editorial rooms and bar rooms of the Bush era, the vapid phrase on the lips of my liberal-minded comrades, repeated like a Maharishi mantra, was that "dissent is patriotic." Now dissent has become the first indication of incipient fascism and subterranean racism. If Rich sees in the current debate the seeds of pogrom, if Krugman sees the rhetoric of "eliminationism," forget national heath care—we need a national history lesson.

Michael Moynihan is a senior editor of Reason magazine

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...and when one ascends to the position of New York Times columnist, ignorance is an unconvincing excuse...

    Actually, it often appears to be a prerequisite.

  • Chicken George||

    Probably the same thing that happened to the people who two years ago saw dissent as treason.

  • Jim Treacher||

    Such as?

  • Sudden||

    See, I don't know where this came from. I really don't recall much in the way of patriotism being questioned by dissenters of the wars, myself included. I never had my loyalty or patriotism impugned for being critical of interventionalism.

  • Some Guy||

    You should have gone to the RNC convention or tuned into Fox News for 5 minutes, then.

  • ||

    Examples, please. I heard plenty of those on the left claiming such things: 'How dare you question my patriotism'! I can't say I ever saw an example of anyone actually doing it. However, I'm sure you can come up with many actual examples. How about a few quotes from that RNC convention or from Fox News?

  • ||

    "I can't say I ever saw an example of anyone actually doing it."

    You can always find people who do this. What matters is when those of influence such as political leaders or those in major media do it.

  • ||

    I agree. So can 'Other Guy' find any such examples? I can only find examples where 'people of influence' on the left question the patriotism of those on the right - or accuse them of treason.
    If 'Other Guy' wants examples, I'll be happy to provide examples. I'll limit myself to Democratic politicians - including liberal pundits would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

  • Some Guy||

    Are you accusing me of not considering those on "the left" just as treasonous as those on "the right"? If anything, I think Dems outnumbered Reps on voting for the bailouts. An act of treason for which I have advocated that they be hung on the steps of the Capitol along with Bush & Paulson, and now Obama (redundant since he voted for it as a Senator) and Gietner.

  • Some Guy||

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIxg7LmlEQg

    That was took about about 30 seconds to find on YouTube. And I'm not even gonna go with Rush, because that'd be too easy.

    Of course if I restricted the search to 2003, I'm sure I'd find plenty of good stuff.

  • Jeffersonian||

    As I read Colbert King's column, all I could see in my mind's eye was Shannon Christian and Chris Newsome being raped, sodomized and murdered. I don't doubt King holds similar rage in his heart.

    See how easy it is to play the game?

  • Jordan||

    "Those same jeering faces," King wrote, "could be seen gathered around the Arkansas National Guard troopers who blocked nine black children from entering Little Rock's Central High School in 1957."

    Forcing people to buy health insurance is akin to integrating public schools. Right...

  • ||

    And Eisenhower has a (D) after his name and the people of Arkansas were all hard-core Repubicans.

  • ||

    Repubicans.

    ewww.

  • ||

    Sorry, my spelling today really suxs.

  • Tomcat1066||

    I don't know. Seemed somewhat accurate, truth be told.

  • JohnD||

    Moron

  • k-y||

    Don't you mean Moran?

  • Meng||

    Eisenhower has a (D) after his name? Since when?

  • ||

    Meng,

    He was making a point by being sarcastic. He was saying that it was the Republican President who sent in the National Guard to allow the black students into the schools, which goes against the modern narrative that Dems are all the good guys and Republicans are all racists.

  • Meng||

    Eisenhower has a (D) after his name? Since when?

  • Alan Vanneman||

    "Those same jeering faces could be seen gathered around the Arkansas National Guard troopers who blocked nine black children from entering Little Rock's Central High School in 1957."

    Except, of course, that they're a whole lot older now. I mean, didn't Colbert write this column in 1957?

  • Kurt Vonnegut||

    I think we need to have a serious talk.

  • ed||

    whatever happened to the editorialist who saw dissent as the highest form of patriotism?

    Did he ever really believe that? The high priesthood of journalism has proved to be little more than a guild of snake oil salesmen and child molesters.

  • ||

    Dissent is treason racist.

  • EMp||

    HA-haaa!!

  • Joshua||

    Don't forget rent-seekers. Government funds for the press my ass!

  • Dello||

    "Those same jeering faces," King wrote, "could be seen gathered around the Arkansas National Guard troopers who blocked nine black children from entering Little Rock's Central High School in 1957."

    Would those be the same jeering faces that could be seen spitting on returning vets from Vietnam?

  • ||

    spitting on returning vets from Vietnam

    This is somthing that I've always heard about, but I've never seen documented.

  • ||

    It happened to my father, so that's documentation for you.

  • dennis||

    mine too, but he admits to doing a lot of drinking on the flight back so he might misremember.

  • Charles Darwin||

    I was just reading a Vientnam-era soldier's first-hand account about being spat on and socially shunned upon his return home.

  • The Gobbler||

    Damn joke tags.

  • rhofulster||

    My uncle (Vietnam grunt) recalls being called a baby burner in Golden Gate Park, but he never said he was spit on.

  • JohnD||

    It happened to me once when I was waiting in a San Francisco bus station shortly after returning from Nam in December 1966. I beat the living crap out of that hippy a_hole and the cops arrested me and escorted me out of the bus station. They then took me to dinner and let me go, apologizing for the behavior of the SF left wing loons.

  • JohnD||

    On the other hand, when I returned home to Birmingham, I was treated really well by everyone.

    In fact I got my first real job over 25 other applicants because I was an "ex"-Marine.

  • Craig||

    But he said "small scale mimicry" so its all good.

  • Rich||

    Until I read this post I thought Sandi was an eliminationist.

    Seriously, the answer to the titular question is "For the most part, no".

  • Marc||

    *concentrates hard*
    don't Godwin the thread, don't Godwin the thread

  • ||

    It's not Godwin if you talk about Italian Fascists.

  • Marc||

    Those Italian Fascists were worse than Hi---

    oh, you're not going to get me that easily.

  • ed||

    Clearly there is a need for a new and expanded definition of Godwin to cover the Dagos. How about...Godolino?

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Mussolini was the Joe Besser* of world leaders. Pretty much still is.

    * Factoid: Joe Besser was temporarily a member of the Three Stooges, but was fired because he considered himself above taking a whipped-cream pie in the face/was an enormous candyass.

  • Mikey||

    Pretty hard not to Godwin the thread when the original post was basically examples of Godwining the debate to start with.

  • ||

    It doesn't matter what this sign says, you'll call it racism anyway!

    That illustration says everything that needs to be said.

  • ||

    How can anyone take these fucking people seriously, ever, any more? If you aren't functionally retarded or a relentless, scumbag partisan, they are such obvious hacks that they are laughable. I cannot watch cable news for longer than 10 seconds any more, for instance; the screaming heads on the screen are so demented that I have to change the channel or go insane.

  • ||

    Excluding 'Stache, of course?

  • ||

    Nope. He might be reasonable but the people he talks to are insane. I can only watch that on Bullshit! because Penn rags on the idiots in the voice-over.

  • ||

    I have to change the channel or go insane

    Didn't get to the remote fast enough, eh?

  • ||

    Temporary insanity, unlike whatever insanity you suffered from when you got married.

  • ||

    Mine's temporary too, in the same way that stars are temporary.

  • ||

    the people he talks to are insane

    Like that fucking guy in the leather jacket, he thinks he's Mick Jagger or something. Somebody get that guy a suit and tie!

  • ||

    Stossel had The Fonz on?

  • ||

    No, but fuck him too.HEYYYYYYYYY!

  • ||

    I think the last time I actually watched network or cable news was on September 11, 2001. Other than maybe a few minutes of sports news and maybe a total of ten minutes of "Bay News 9", the Brighthouse news channel (our cable used to start there when you turned the box on). Yes, and maybe a little local hurricane news when Charlie was coming at us. That's it.

  • ||

    If I'm at someone's house, such as my grandparents, and they have it on, I have to get out of earshot even. These people are fucking crazy, dude.

  • ||

    when Charlie was coming at us.

    Were you in 'Nam? We need evidence that you were spat upon.

  • Jimmy 'Crack' Corn||

    Anecdotal evidence required?

    I was there, when I came home I was never spat on, never given a hard time. (Came home in 1969)

  • wayne||

    I was there in '72. Noboday ever spit on me, but there weren't throngs of citizens shaking our hands and hugging us as we got off the plane either.

    Different time, different war.

  • Joshua||

    Thank you both for your service.

  • ||

    No. It turned out that Charlie didn't surf, so the storm hit Punta Gorda instead of Tampa.

  • Joe C||

    It was Charley, wasn't it. Bay News 9 is always good for a laugh.

  • Jordan||

    Last night, somebody honked at me in traffic. That hateful bastard might as well have chained me to the back of his truck and dragged me to death.

  • Jesse||

    It's just like Selma, man.

  • Jesse Jackson||

    Yes, now the automobile companies should donate 5 million dollars to my PUSH/Rainbow coalition for allowing those honkeys to have horns!

  • Ah, Clem||

    Honk! Honk!

  • ¢||

    I enjoy that "eliminationist rhetoric" is becoming, via Goldhagenian transition, an eliminationism-justifying piece of rhetoric. Ironically self-proving theories are neat.

    This is somthing that I've always heard about, but I've never seen documented.

    I've never seen Friday the 13th Part VII, and the accounts of it that aren't suspiciously alike vary suspiciously.

  • Scotch Hamilton||

    Mr Moyihan: the idea is to stop the Tea Parties from becoming the next Kristallnacht...

  • ||

    Dan, you were better before. D-.

  • G. W. Bush||

    Preemptive strike, I hear ya.

  • ||

    "the idea is to stop the Tea Parties from becoming the next Kristallnacht..."

    Wow, are you a retard, or do you just play one on television?

  • ||

    Bet. Next Nazi-level shit that happens in the West (maybe outside the West), the victims will be called "Nazis." Bet.

  • Sudden||

    Tolerance, the new justification for intolerant murder. Makes perfect sense really... at least in the modern Orwellian world.

  • cynical||

    Won't bet. That shit works against minorities, not "everything more right-wing than ACLU liberals". Well, I guess it's possible for them to try it, I just don't see it working out very well for them.

  • ||

    Yeah, it would probably be a little different when the intended victims are the ones who have guns in their homes.

  • Tomcat1066||

    Right. That's only valid if we accept the premise that tea party = racist. Personally, I don't.

  • Jimmy 'Crack' Corn||

    Are you sure this isn't 'Chad' in a grumpy mood?

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Here's an idea: Put every Ron Paul supporter on a terrorist watch list. Bingo! Instant database.

    You okay with that, Scotch?

  • ||

    They already did that, remember?

    http://reason.com/blog/2009/03.....ob-barr-bu

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    I know... I was testing Scotch to see if HE knew.

  • ||

    Accusations of racism are a strategic tool in the arsenal of the Democratic Party. That's how Democrats keep African-Americans in their fold. African-Americans are rather socially conservative and could benefit directly from some of the policies supported by Republicans such as school vouchers. Plus, Republicans, unfortunately from my point of view, can convincingly portray themselves as economic populists.

    Nonetheless, a white Republican will get at most 10% of the black vote against a white Democrat. Why? Because African-Americans sincerely believe that Republicans are a bunch of racists.

    In fact I don't think Republicans even try to compete for the black vote anymore. They just go out of their way not to appear racist to the middle-of-the-road whites because most white Americans abhor racism. This explains why Republican officials don't support state-wide referendums to ban affirmative action.

    Now the Left uses its reliable tool on a slightly different target: the Tea Party.

  • Tony||

    I don't think Democrats use accusations of racism as a strategic tool. At most I think it can be justifiably said that liberals can be hypersensitive to racism, and perhaps see it where it doesn't exist.

    However it is demonstrably true that Republicans have used white racism as an electoral strategy for decades. If it's not welfare queens it's illegal aliens. Add a soupcon of homophobia and Bush gets over the line in 2004. Their main--I'd say only--strategy has been increasingly subtler methods of scaring their old white base into showing up in large numbers. And the easiest way to scare old white Republicans is to imply that their identity as the dominant culture in the country is existentially threatened.

    It is truly a leap of rationalization to excuse the almost complete lack of racial diversity in the party (except for a few appointed tokens) by blaming the other side for duping racial minorities. Black people don't vote Republican because Republicans have never given a crap about their issues, and indeed have used fear of black people as a motivator for their base.

    So granted liberals might overreact in the age of a black president. But it's also true that if you're looking for casual white racists a Tea Party isn't the last place you'd go.

  • Ska||

    But it's also true that if you're looking for casual white racists ______ isn't the last place you'd go.

    Now let's play some Mad Libs!

  • ||

    No doubt the Left's ethnic Balkanization program will eventually beget racial violence, and a perfect justification for Tony's Martial Law.

    If minorities really believe you statists won't turn on them when the demographics shift, then your teachers unions have truly done their job, Congrats.

    All these years you could focus the stock hatred for the masses that comes standard w/ Leftism squarely on the honkees, while they were the supermajority.

    But one day you wake up and, OMG, all the excuses you made for the cute li'l darkies - homophobic? misogynist? not their fault, it's the oppression - and the cocksuckers can't have the decency to put their groceries in a canvas sack?! WTF.

    And the birth rates? More melanin = more... CO2? My God!

    Hopefully by then the TPs will have nullified a couple states so the brown refugees have somewhere to run to from Greenie-nacht.

  • 29InNet||

    "Fully 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate, a 2-percentage-point rise in their national turnout. As in past years, black women turned out at a higher rate than black men." Politico.com.

    Blacks must hate whites...or 51% whites.

  • ||

    To the last sentence of your para three: 1856 - 1940.

  • jdb||

    You're correct Ping. It's been approximately 60 years since the Republican party was the progressive, populist movement that it was under Lincoln.

    It's now a shadow of its former self, and the Democrats have made up for a lot of past history by showing that, regardless of how (by today's standards) evil and racist Southern Democrats *were*, they've actually moved on. Yes, there have been notable Republican advances on civil rights issues. That doesn't negate the sentiment of the majority of blacks that the current GOP seems to think the civil rights fight is over and everything is hunky-dory.

  • KPres||

    Amazingly, Tony, the Reason's resident left-winger, doesn't think the race card is used by the Democrats as a strategic tool, but in his ever so humble opinion, he finds that Republicans use white racism as a strategic tool.

    I never would have thought he'd feel that way.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    "I don't think Democrats use accusations of racism as a strategic tool."

    Coming from someone who equated libertarianism and fascism in a favorable light, why should we believe you now, Tony?

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Another thought, Tony:

    Y'ever stop to think that maybe it's more like blacks don't want to join the GOP, and less like there's big, burly skinhead fuckwads at the door PREVENTING them from joining the GOP?

    Oh, and fuck the GOP. I'm just sayin' it's more the former, and not the latter at all. The New Black Panthers, OTOH, do stand at the doorway... but the AG let 'em skate on that rap.

  • ||

    Yeah but that's ok because.....um....wait, why did they get let off?

  • ||

    Democrats are at least as anti-immigrant as Republicans. After all, it's ALL about protecting the interests of domestic labor. Just for example, Obama has put on hold allowing Mexican truckers onto US roads, despite them having a *better* safety record that US truckers. This on behalf of the truckers unions, which are threatened by foriegn labor.

    Significant slices of the Republican party (see Dick Armey, FreedomWorks) are in fact very pro-immigration. It's good for US businesses to be able to hire foreign workers, especially in high-tech fields where there aren't enough US workers to fill the positions.

    As for "welfare queens", calling that racism is effectively saying that anyone who doesn't support the welfare state is a racist. And incidentally, it was *Clinton* that passed welfare reform.

  • JohnD||

    And the Dems have used the blacks for decades. Most of you are to stupid to realize you don't mean crap to the Dems, other than a guaranteed vote.

    And you are so typical. Any criticism of any black is seen as racist.

    Frankly, you make me want to puke.

  • jdb||

    "And the Dems have used the blacks for decades. Most of you are to stupid to realize you don't mean crap to the Dems, other than a guaranteed vote."

    You're being ironic, right? Because if not, you're only proving why "most of you" are smart enough to vote for a party that doesn't malign them and their worth.

    Unlike, say, you.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    I don't think Democrats use accusations of racism as a strategic tool.


    "It's not 'spic' or 'nigger' anymore. They say, 'Let's cut taxes" - Charlie
    Rangel

    Black people don't vote Republican because Republicans have never given a crap about their issues, and indeed have used fear of black people as a motivator for their base.


    What are these issues, Chony?

  • ||

    I don't think Democrats use accusations of racism as a strategic tool.

    You are correct. It's actually a tactical tool.

  • Tomcat1066||

    I had a Republican State Rep tell me that the GOP wouldn't put money behind a candidate in the GA Second due to the demographics. To many blacks for a Republican to do well here, according to their theory.

  • wackyjack||

    It's been made abundantly clear that the RNC and the DNC are made up of complete and utter assholes.

    If you want to work in politics, you run for office. If you're too much of an idiot (though that bar gets lower and lower), or did some really dirty things (again), you work for a campaign. If you're too much of a fuckup for a campaign to hire you, you work for the party.

    The parties only care about beating the other guys. For the RNC, that means they won't even try to win them thar negro districts.

  • JohnD||

    Well "Tomcat", the fact that 97% of blacks voted for Obama (because he was black) I would say the Repubs understand demographics a hell of a lot better than you do.

  • Tomcat1066||

    Just got back to this, but I couldn't let it stand without saying SOMETHING.

    JohnD: Go fuck yourself. I didn't say their theory was necessarily wrong, and I didn't say they could win that particular district. I was relaying what I was told by an elected official who happens to be part of the GOP.

    *I* understand demographics quite fucking well. Do you understand the English language?

  • Tomcat1066||

    Just got back to this, but I couldn't let it stand without saying SOMETHING.

    JohnD: Go fuck yourself. I didn't say their theory was necessarily wrong, and I didn't say they could win that particular district. I was relaying what I was told by an elected official who happens to be part of the GOP.

    *I* understand demographics quite fucking well. Do you understand the English language?

  • ||

    In spite of my hateful criticism of Moynihan in the past, I like this article. It was good.

    However, I still wonder what is going on in the mind of a cosmo(no offense).

    You say that we need a national history lesson, which ya I can see that...but is that really why the fucking Washington Post and New York Times columnists are writing that ignorant crap?

    As you say "when one ascends to the position of New York Times columnist, ignorance is an unconvincing excuse"....so if it isn't ignorance then we are left with what? conspiracy?

  • Brian Combs||

    Intentional manipulation.

  • ||

    right it is intentional...but is Frank Rich just put into a high position and he decides to intentionally do his deeds and the owners of the NYT are oblivious? no of course not...there are many involved and therefore by definition it is a conspiracy. Yet according to Moynihan conspiracy theories are the worst thing to happen to this country and must be fought tooth and nail. It is a bit ridiculous.

  • Barry Loberfeld||

    From here:

    For Leftists, all evil is mass evil -- "systemic," "institutional" evil -- against which only they stand. Just look at how over these past decades American racism has contracted in practice (largely because of the revolt against government-imposed segregation) but exploded in Leftist theory. The "rape culture" has also become a "racist society." It's gone from bigotry being the province of an Archie Bunker to this being a nation of Archie Bunkers -- and worse. Contemporary America is routinely described by such figures as Julianne Malveaux ("two hundred million white racists"), Joe Faegin ("every major aspect of life [here] is shaped ... by racist realities"), and Maulana Karenga ("increasing racism and continuing commitment to white supremacy") in terms honestly applicable to only apartheid or Nazism. But it's a progression not without its own logic: The greater the evil of the social masses, the greater the good of the socialist elite.
  • ||

    In other words, to feel better about yourselves, you demonize your enemies.

    How can you feel morally superior to the tea baggers if they're NOT a bunch of racist Nazis?

  • ||

    excellent observation!

  • ||

    Likewise, a journalist who chased Bill Clinton scandals for a conservative magazine in the 1990s recently told me how silly it all seemed with the clarifying benefit of hindsight. At the time, he said, it all seemed so reasonable.

    Ahem.

  • ||

    Just me posting here officially makes this comment thread more diverse than MSNBC's primetime lineup and the NYT editorial page. I'm a million minorities in one!

  • Ed Schultz||

    Hey, AC, I'll give you five bucks a week to watch my show.

    Please?

  • ||

    "Everything for the state. Nothing against the state. Nothing outside the state." Mussolini
    "I have no plan to streamline government or make it more efficient for I mean to reduce its size." Goldwater

  • Jimmy 'Crack' Corn||

    Never heard that Goldwater quote. Love it.

  • The Gobbler||

    I got your racists right here:

    Vernon Jones loses DeKalb discrimination suit

    A federal jury on Thursday awarded two former DeKalb County parks employees more than $170,000 in damages in the long-running racial discrimination case against the county.

    The decision comes after seven days of evidence and testimony before a jury of five whites and one black in a cased filed six years ago by four plaintiffs who claimed Jones, DeKalb’s first black CEO when elected in 2000, orchestrated a scheme to replace three top white managers in the parks department with blacks.

    http://www.ajc.com/news/vernon.....26095.html

  • fish||

    Racism...not just for whites anymore! Get yours today!

  • Jesse||

    Sheeeeit, that's reparations, baby.

  • ||

    I would assume the comparison to the Night of Broken Glass was a comparison to bricks being thrown through windows at night and breaking glass as part of a political movement, which did in fact happen both in 1938 Europe and our very own 2010 US of A.

    Is it wrong of me to Occam's Razor this to the most obvious explanation?

  • ||

    I'm not saying it's a great comparison, I'm just saying you don't need to write a treatise to figure out what the guy meant.

  • Jordan||

    There's a little bit more to the Night of Broken Glass than the fact that glass was broken at night. You know that, I know that, and so does this douche, which is why he chose that instead of say a G8 demonstration or the L.A. riots.

  • Jim Treacher||

    Let's be fair. Maybe jcalton didn't know that.

  • ||

    There's a little bit more to the Night of Broken Glass than the fact that glass was broken at night.

    Understatement of the month.

  • ||

    Did you know that the Final Solution was similar to answering an algebra problem?

  • ||

    so this is what its like with the IGMFU crowd. awesome. because the author disagrees with the description by the nyt, nothing ever happened. how convenient.

  • Almanian||

    because the author disagrees with the description by the nyt, nothing ever happened no proof has been presented to confirm the contentions, and there are clearly no events that equate to what occurred in 1938 Kristallnacht, the author questions whether the NYT author douchebag is engaging in hyperbole.

    FIFY

  • ||

    One minor point of disagreement in an otherwise wonderful essay:

    In the weeks following the 9/11 attacks, Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter declared solemnly and with regret that irony had vanished in the smoke and embers of the demolished World Trade Center, a judgment that seemed plausible at the time.

    No, it didn't. The only people bemoaning "the end of irony" at that time were those few who had built their entire careers on it and suddenly felt pangs of guilt at the meaningless of just about every word they'd ever produced. And even for them, "the end" only lasted about two weeks.

  • ||

    way to be an apologist, Reason. I hear it all around me every day. Hate is core to the tea party movement.

  • Sandi||

    I took a shit in Sue's mouth once.

  • ||

    Sue,

    Blow it out your ass. "Liberal" isn't a race.

    -jcr

  • Almanian||

    No, Sue - they only hate you. It has nothing to do with race.

    There, don't you feel better :)

  • Jimmy 'Crack' Corn||

    "I hear it all around me every day."

    Sounds like you are hanging around the NYT press room.

  • ||

    Hate is just the emotion that humans experience when confronted with something that should not exist. For instance, rampant usurpation of their lives by the political class. So, to say that hate is core to the tea party movement isn't a condemnation of tea party movement unless you can demonstrate that the actual hate involved is not correctly aimed at something that shouldn't exist.

  • EMp||

    ..."hate that which is evil, cling to that which is good." :-)

  • ||

    way to be an apologist, Reason. I hear it all around me every day. Hate is core to the tea party movement.

  • Sandi||

    I took a shit in Sue's mouth once.

  • ||

    And look at the stuff that's coming out!

  • hah||

    me too

  • wayne||

    what, exactly, do you hear all around you?

  • bruno||

    I would think goofy illustrations like this by these columnists would have the effect of turning off reasonable folks. Unintended reverse psychology.

  • Suki||

    I really don't think their target audience is the reasonable crowd.

  • Jimmy 'Crack' Corn||

    +3

  • Suki||

    This bizarre invocation of genocide was to be found on the op-ed page, from the hysterical ex-theater critic and Tea Party obsessive Frank Rich.

    Was that homophobic or homosexist?

  • ||

    It could be both!

  • ||

    Well we've officially moved from "we have to pass it to see what's in it" to "it has to go into effect (in 2014) before you judge whether it's a good idea".

    "Every single day since I signed the reform law, there's been another poll or headline that said, 'Nation still divided on health care reform. Polls haven't changed yet.' Well, yes. It just happened last week," Obama said to laughter.

    He continued: "Can you imagine if some of these reporters were working on a farm and you planted some seeds, and they came out the next day and they looked and — 'Nothing's happened. There's no crop. We're going to starve. Oh, no! It's a disaster!' It's been a week, folks. So, before we find out if people like health care reform, we should wait to see what happens when we actually put it into place. Just a thought."
  • Almanian||

    STUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAK!!

  • Ben Stein||

    Bueler? Bueler?

  • Suki||

    Can't that be remedied with plutonium? I saw Homer Simpson do it on TV with my own eyes!

  • ||

    After reviewing the film, it's obvious that there had to have been a second spitter.

  • wayne||

    post a link.

  • Almanian||

    "Down, and to the left...down, and to the left..."

  • ||

    Did Kramer get hit with the spit too?

  • nebby||

    I guess the obverse of the illustration would be showing the bone in the nose witch doctor sign and saying there was no racism in that either. The tea party folk have racists in their midsts that are tolerated by the other people protesting and excused by supporters in places like H and R. Saying the tea party protests don't have a racist element is as silly as saying they are 100% racist.

  • wayne||

    But the libs have absolutely no racist element, absolutely none I tell you.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    That's not the point, nebby... what we're saying is the number of racists in the TP movement isn't 100%.

    Yes, one racist in a thousand is too much, but let's be frank - the Olbermanns of the world are convinced the entire anti-Obama/anti-Democrat movment is composed solely of racists and other assorted haters.

    It's bullshit, of course, but it sells to the gullible. You bought into it, for instance.

  • ||

    Which is like saying the anti-war movement didn't have an america-hating socialist fucktard component.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Which is like saying the anti-war movement didn't have an america-hating socialist fucktard component.


    Or an anti-Jewish component, as David Duke illustrated in Syria.

  • ||

    "Which is like saying the anti-war movement didn't have an america-hating socialist fucktard component."

    Still going on and still stupid. This is from March 20. Winning picture - "Fuck Capitalism" teeshirt with the $15 price tag. Also notice the raging anti-semitism and just plain bat-shit crazy oozing off of these clowns.

    http://www.ringospictures.com/index.php?page=20100320

  • JohnD||

    Of course there is a racist element to the tea party. So what?
    There isn't a racist element to the Dem party? What do you call it when 97% of blacks vote for Obama and continue to be his main base of support, regardles of what he does?

  • Brett Stevens||

    For those who read history:

    Diversity doesn't work.

    Ethnic, religious and "social class" (IQ) diversity causes friction, not solves it.

    We are not the first nation to realize that if two racial groups exist, the one on top is going to be the target of the one on bottom, socioeconomically.

    It's time to end the diversity experiment, unless of course we would rather look cool to our friends that do the practical thing.

  • Tony||

    How do you propose we "end the diversity experiment"?

  • West Texas Boy||

    Oh, I dunno, quit discriminating in favor one group at the expense of another?

  • ||

    We have always been told that only whites can be guilty of true racism because they have all "the power". Minorities have no power so they can't act out their racism, even if they were capable of racism (so this thinking goes). As more and more minorities move into positions of power, does this protective mantle of immunity from racism affect how they use that power? How do the actions of the DeKalb County first black CEO and his cronies not qualify as racism backed by power according to the classic definition? We are feeding the beast with this idea that only whites are guilty of racism and that discrimination against whites is a justified rebalancing of the scales. To my mind, this is the great crime of modern liberalism - the constant stoking of racial distrust and division by promoting special privileges for certain groups and decreeing common sense economic policies "racist". Lincoln said that a country divided against itself cannot stand and he is still right.

  • ||

    We have always been told that only whites can be guilty of true racism because they have all "the power".

    All power is local. (I don't recall who said that.)

  • ||

    Where the hell did I misplace that power? Oh, didn't get my share.

  • Tony||

    I just find it a bit odd that after centuries of the "special privileges" that go way beyond affirmative action programs that whites have enjoyed, now that some want to work to correct the historical imbalance it's all of a sudden time to end the "special privileges."

    It's also a hoot that people have all of a sudden started using the rhetoric of social justice and MLK, but to describe the oppressed plight of white people in the age of liberalism.

  • Marian Kechlibar||

    *it's all of a sudden time*

    40 years is not "all of a sudden". Most people currently alive in the USA have been influenced by these laws.

    "It's also a hoot"

    No, it is perfectly logical. Because the reality is that you have anti-white and anti-EastAsian laws in the USA, backed with remedying of historical events that took place several generations before. Based on this logic, recent immigrants from, say, Albania or Moldova will be discriminated against solely because of color of their skin, although they themselves arrived from extremely poor countries and had historically zero benefits from slavery and segregation.

    There are about 1 billion whites in this world and the American laws discriminate against them all (should any of them move to the USA), why? Well, based on actions of distant ancestors of a tiny subfragment of them. Perfectly logical. A "Blood libel" against anyone who was born with white skin.

    In my opinion, white people seriously need their Martin Luther King. End the "shame and guilt" culture once and for all. Enough was enough.

  • ||

    Agreed. I'm still waiting to see one really good argument somewhere for why racism as thought is bad. Not one of the columnists quoted here comes up with a compelling argument for why it's bad; all that's ever offered is the lame Mr. Garrison-like "Racism is bad, mmmkay?"

    Using the Holocaust and Kristallnacht as evidence for why "racism is bad, mmmkay?" is essentially offering nothing but anecdotal evidence. There is a huge, huge gap in thought and actions between, "These people and their entitlement-reeking cult of victimhood piss me off and I'm going to spend as little time around them as I can get away with" and "these people should be rounded up and eliminated."

    Yes, I am a racist. There are some neighborhoods I would never, ever consider living, and don't visit. I don't donate money to African-relief-this or African-Crisis-du-Jour-that because I might as well burn the money; you can't change people from the outside by force if they don't seem to ever want to change and stop blowing each other up. Haitian quake refugees won't see any money from me either, for the same reason. If I were walking down the street at night, and there were a couple of black kids in falling-off-the-ass jeans coming toward me, I'd cross the street. When I'm driving, and I'm stuck behind some beater car that's traveling 10 MPH under the speed limit, I immediately think the driver's from some Central American tarantula republic, and as I pass them, I find I'm virtually always right. When I'm stuck behind some slow-ass champagne-colored Accord or Lexus sedan, I immediately think "DWA," and I've got a near-100% accuracy rate with that one, too.

    I make judgments about people based upon observed patterns in their behavior over time. In other words, I'm a human being.

    Thought is not a crime. Period. Maybe this makes me an asshole, but I really don't care; some paternalistic finger-shaking isn't really likely to make me stop thinking this way, so I wonder why people like Sue here keep trying. Assault, yes; that's a crime. But I'm not laying a finger on them, and I'm not causing them job losses. Live and let live, just keep the hell away from me with your shrieking drama, your dumbassed teen moms, your 70-decibel car-speakers that rattle house windows three blocks away, and your driving 10 MPH under the speed limit.

    As long as I, or Tea Party whackjobs for that matter, are not causing harm or loss to brown people, "your opinion is noted," AFAIC.

  • Jackrungh||

    This passes the libertarian sniff-test, no force or fraud employed.
    I think many of us classical liberals are gung-ho in decrying government, but I would expect fewer to defend the racist corporation whose policy is, "No blacks need apply."

    It's a private business, and using force to impose discrimination law is the only rights violation involved.

  • dennis||

    I think libertarianism has to go farther than this though. We can acknowledge that bigots have property rights and rights of association that shouldn't be trumped by anti-discrimination legislation, but racism is against the very core ideals of libertarianism. Libertarians should work to assure that racists are relegated to pariah status.

  • Jackrungh||

    I agree, but this is the difference between regulation and ridicule. The latter is often a much more effective social tool, and does not initiate force against anyone. Using the threat of violence to enforce sin legislation is a moral cop-out. In a truly free system we get exactly the sort of society we deserve.

  • ||

    +1

  • ||

    "Libertarians should work to assure that racists are relegated to pariah status."

    Right! There oughta be a law!

  • dennis||

    When did I state that there ought to be a law? I think that anti-racism laws only serve to further entrench racism, and hurt the groups they are supposed to help, and more damningly they involve violence against victimless behavior. That said, libertarianism is more than just "keep the government out of my business" it involves notions of individualism that are contradicted by racism, as such libertarians should respect the rights of bigots, but should oppose racist attitudes non-violently.

  • Jackrungh||

    Total agreement.

  • D-niegh me Pro-state||

    the problem with using force to impose a perceived moral good (anti-discrimination) is that you cannot do something good by doing wrong to attain it. If a person is forced into a workplace which discriminates against him, he will then be the target of hostility not only for race, but for forcing his way into where he was not wanted.
    If, However, the man is denied the job he has the opportunity to compete against the company by finding another company or starting his own. Then, if his skill is superior he can begger the racist fucks.

  • ||

    Is this Anthony Cumia?

  • ||

    I hate to say it, but I kind of agree with this. Especially this:"Maybe this makes me an asshole, but I really don't care; some paternalistic finger-shaking isn't really likely to make me stop thinking this way, so I wonder why people like Sue here keep trying."

    I grew up around a bunch of other races; my step family is 100% Mexican, I love them. I wouldn't handle the situation the same as you, avoiding everything. But again, I can't really blame you, you can only act based off of your own experience, who am I, or Sue, to judge you?

  • Joe C||

    You've confused Mr. Garrison with Mr. Mackey, mmkay?

  • cynical||

    You're demanding we assume that there must be a "top" and "bottom" race. Outside of legal discrimination or aftereffects from same, that seems like an assumption that only makes sense if you believe in social darwinism.

    If you assume that race is at most a very minor influence on personal ability relative to the massive variation in human beings, then it makes no more sense to assume that a race would be on top than a hair color or eye color would be on top.

    Now, if you're talking about culture and multiculturalism, you may have a point. Some ideas and values are more useful than others. In a melting pot situation, specific cultural values will compete as much smaller units, rather than whole cultures being compared, so that the strongest points of all cultures will tend to propagate to everyone in society, rather than the strongest overall culture dominating the weaker ones.

  • ||

    People don't necessarily have to form their social in-groups along lines of skin color.

    But the politics of identity and victimhood almost inevitably force them to. If you've got an ethnic minority declaring itself forever separate and victimized, it's hard to get them to identify across racial lines, and it's hard to get the majority to do the same. You don't become "one people" by constantly reminding everyone else how they've victimized you and demanding special treatment.

  • ||

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/p.....594187379/

  • Jamie Kay||

    Obama is an ignorant, entitlement-minded cunt surrounded by racists. I am looking forward to the day that his black ass -- yes, BLACK ass -- is sitting on a curb.

  • dennis||

    Why does the above post make me think a lefty is posting here trying to paint such sentiment as "the true face of libertarianism?"

  • West Texas Boy||

    I think he forgot the "tee hee hee" at the end of his troll.

  • John||

    Right, republicans are not motivated by race.

  • Bolshevist||

    The people's flag is deepest red,
    It shrouded oft our martyr'd dead
    And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
    Their hearts' blood dyed its ev'ry fold.

    Then raise the scarlet standard high,
    Within its shade we'll live and die,
    Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
    We'll keep the red flag flying here.

  • ||

    One need only look at the things said about Bush (I'm not a big fan)as well as the caricatures of him to see the gross double standard. How about the racist cartoon caricature of Condoleezza Rice as Aunt Jemima? THAT was racist. Any mention by our friends at the MSM? Not a chance.

  • ||

    Yeah. No one in the main media outlets were exactly decrying her treatment.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    But that was okay, see, because when Democrats pull the "Uncle Tom" Treatment... it's allowed.

  • West Texas Boy||

    I've often heard people comment that, "Racism is in the eyes of the bejolder" but that's wrong.

    Racism is in the actually eyes of the media.

  • ||

    But that was okay, see, because when Democrats pull the "Uncle Tom" Treatment... it's allowed.

    Any label that assumes or insists that an individul must behave or believe a certain way because of their race is racist.

  • ||

    Gin up the fear, get the tinfoil hat crowd frothing, keep the “base” activated. That’s all this is about and both sides do it.

  • ||

    Good point. Whipping up hate towards the "tea baggers" seems ot be an effective way to get the Democratic base frothing at the mouth.

  • Toni T||

    Thank you for your essay. I've read a lot of opinions about the recent anti-government factions, and I've tried to hear both sides. Most is typically Donkey v Elephant rhetoric, with very little historical comparison.

    This piece is, simply, beautiful. I wish more people would open their eyes and minds to the realities of America-Today. Instead, I see many citizens manipulated by the party leaders who twist the facts with faulty memories of America-Yesterday. At the risk of representing Mr. King's image of a "Southern, backwoods, gun-totin' racist", let me say I'm a country music fan (yes, I also live in Texas. Shocker!). A song that comes to mind is Jamey Johnson "You Should Have Seen It In Color" about a young boy looking at the black and white photos of his grandfather. Sadly, Mr. King and his kind (the Biased, Propaganda-spewing MEDIA Kind) is that they still view everything in black-and-white. So on that note, I will admit to PROUDLY seeing the color of everything.

  • Han Solo||

    I wanna make a sign that says "KILL THE MEDIA!!"

    Maybe if enough people started taking the fight back to them they would not be so arrogant and loose with their lies and false accusations.

    Its getting the point where if someone bombed NBC or CBS I would have to really hold in the cheers and smiles.

    /forgive me for my bad thoughts

  • ||

    Forgiven.

  • CE||

    The history lesson should start with the 1760's in the British Colonies of New England, and the truly violent and intimidating protests by the American "rabble".... When the Tea Partiers start tarring and feathering the politicians, and riding them out of town on a rail, then there'll be something worth writing about.

    Although it is funny to see so many Establishment types shaking in their loafers over a rather mild form of political dissent.

  • ||

    It is worth noting that when Jesse Jackson appeared in Portland this week, leftist anarchists and "civil rights" demonstrators injured several policemen, vandalized buildings and, notably, a police building was attacked. Where are the accusations of leftist extremist violence?

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Well, Jack, it's okay when liberal anarchists do stuff like that.

    At least, in their minds.

  • ||

    They're hearts are in the right place after all.

    By which I mean, hating capitalism.

  • ||

    s/They're/Their

  • Adonisus||

    I can say with absolute certainty that the vast (and I do mean VAST) majority of the Tea Partiers are NOT racist. In fact, I'd go even further and say that neither racial politics or social conservatism are in no way a major part of the Tea Party equation.

    Now, yes, there have been the occasional individuals with racist slogans and signs, and those individuals have been summarily denounced by the whole of the Tea Partiers. There have even been those who have broken off from the movement to start their own mini-movement because the Tea Party didn't acknowledge America was a 'christian nation'.

    It's almost entirely economic in nature.

  • Joe C||

    If you're going to do a piece on racism, at least provide us with a good example of it:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu-x9Bjq6QI

  • JohnD||

    Great clip. Barbara Boxer is a disgusting cunt

  • ||

    Is Frank Rice still writing? I stopped reading the NYT over 7 years ago but I seem to remember that name and does Mike Lupica work social commentary inbto his sports column or does he write social commentary exclusively? I only read sports stats not any writer's views on who Alex Rodriguez is dating or what Puljos thinks about health reform.

    Great article.

  • ||

    complaining about being called a racist makes you a racist. It's not enough to be tarred with such epithets, you have to agree with them.

  • MJ||

    The Frank Rich's of the world accuse the groups they disagree with of being racist so that they can feel a sense of moral superiority over them and so that they do not have to engage in an actual argument against their views.

    "Because the vision of the anointed is vision of themselves as well as a vision of the world, when they are defending a set of hypotheses abount external events, they are in a sense defending their very souls - and the zeal and ruthlessness with which they defend their vision are not surprising under the circumstances." - Thomas Sowell

  • John||

    You know the tea party movement, republican vitriol is motivated by the fact that whites are a shrinking part of the electorate, I know it. You would be more convincing if you admitted it.

  • JohnD||

    Yeah, I can't wait until the Dems make all the illegal aliens citizens. I'll really laugh when their are no more white democrats in congress.

  • RightWired||

    That includes Reid, Pelosi, Boxer, Gayson, Hillary and Obama! sounds like a good plan!

  • ||

    A much better argument for fascism is the health care bill itself, which is a host of government subsidies and mandates favoring the health care, pharmaceutical, and insurance industries. Does not fascism allow private ownership under state control?

  • West Texas Boy||

    Corporatism is a major element of fascism, yes.

    More than once I have heard rebuttals made to "Obama is a socialist" by people pointing out "It's more like corporatism, but you really don't know what socialism is so I'm not going to actually argue with you anyway, you rube. Political philosophy FAIL!... ha! ha!"

    So then I call him a Jacobin and they often say, "but he's not French!"

    True story.

  • nekoxgirl||

    I think it makes the most sense to call him a statist. Socialism, communism, fascism, etc. its all really the same thing. The symbols are different but it all amounts to big government and corporatism.

  • RightWired||

    It's NOT about race, moron.

    I am PROUD Tea Party Patriot, and in an interracial marriage with a legal immigrant for the past 13 years.

    So why don't you just piss off, socialist pig?

    moron.

  • ||

    I have to wonder how many times Obama can talk about the desirability of government control of redistribution of weatlh (even to the point of criticizing the Constitution for not revolving around the very concept) before some people will realize that the claim that O. is a communist are not too terribly bizarre. No, he's not a card-carrying Party member; I doubt that he has the mental discipline the Party requires of its minions. But a somewhat simple-minded, sophmoric and romantic idea of communism, well, that's another matter.

  • ||

    ............and now we take you to a typical liberal/Progressive/ Democrat:

    http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=24268

  • ||

    Now dissent has become the first indication of incipient fascism and subterranean racism.

    Demonize those who disagree with you. If you do this well enough, you are then justified in exterminating them (at least metaphorically).

  • Suck it up Crybaby||

    Sorry Article, Nazi's were socialist like Obama, He and the Dems will play the race card and anything else that is ethical or unethical. As long as it pushed their agenda. There have been no recorded incidents of racist threats or physical assaults from the Tea Party, you can not associate a whole group from the actions of a minute few. All have been hearsay. If there was it would be all over ABC,CBS, NBC,CNN,NBC,CSNBS,and every other far left news rag. The left just beats people up weather they are men, women or in a wheelchair and those stations say nothing. Just call out your union thugs to do your dirty work. Why oh why did Eric Holder dismiss the case against the two Black Panthers at the polling place in Philadelphia who were intimidating voters with the billy club? Gee wees guys,this sounds like a racist action? Black Panther leader Malik Z.Shabazz called his buddy Holder and the case was sweep under the rug. Hmmm why?
    www.suckitupcrybaby.com

  • ||

    You can spin it all you want but it looks to a lot of us that the variable that best predicts the intensity of the TPs opposition to a government program would be the perceived race of the people benefited by the program.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Anyone of any race can be poor. Your post = fail.

  • ||

    You Regressives gotta remember. We only considered you unpatriotic and treacherous after the decision to go to war was made, and you changed on a dime just cuz massive amounts of WMD weren't piled everywhere for the taking. We only gave the guy 3+ months to get rid of whatever he might have had. Anyway, using the blood and money expended on the battlefield to gain political power is treasonous IMO and politicians who have done should be called on it. This rubbish wouldn't have been tolerated during WW2.

  • ||

    Sentence from the teaser text for this article: "Many of the protesters seem to believe that the president of the United States of America is a communist, demonstrating that they have a level of historical understanding on par with Frank Rich." Huh? Since when did Frank Rich become the exemplar of historical ignorance? You lost me... I understand that you probably don't like Frank Rich's views, but this kind of potshot seems to be kind of unreasonable.

  • Jimmy 'Crack' Corn||

    "Since when did Frank Rich become the exemplar of historical ignorance?"

    Frank Rich has become famous in his own eyes since 2005. Before that he was the NYT Theatre critic.

    I believed he watched two may reruns of Wag The Dog.

  • ||

    ALL
    If one wants the Leftist View point on this subject, raw and ranting. Go to Democratic Underground. Article there and the comments are unfit to copy and paste.
    Suffice to say. The Tea Party folks come in for there undeserved share of abuse.
    bt
    We, you and I, live in a land that is fast being herded into divided camps of thought, opines, and even physical demographically controlled areas. The old bugaboo of Race, whatever that term implies, to whomever, is the Prod.
    If we continue to allow the Left to prod, push, decry, and outright smear our efforts to be heard, all in the Action Front Tactic of calling our efforts Racism, we should be ashamed. We get it. We now fully understand where and why the OBNA is prodding us. Will we stand or will we sheepalong?
    The future is ours to determine. As John Wayne told his CowBOYS, Daylight is Burning.
    We Will Prevail
    Semper Fi
    end

  • someguy||

    Reps tend to hate Obama for the complete wrong reasons. A third of them think he's "Muslim" and it would not surprise me how many think he's the "anti-Christ". They discredit moderate thinkers with real objections to the president's policies. I'm not saying I'm a 'Democrat', by a longshot, but the Reps are not the 'lesser evil', but an equal one. The 'tea party' thing has been overtaken by the Reps, it seems like. A lot of their supporters are overly religious grade A morons who say they're big on 'limited government'.....but truthfully, are only so unless it involves a RIGHT-wing and/or theocratic agenda.

  • Chris||

    Agreed. Reps are every bit as big government as the Dems they decry, and it becomes more obvious that the TP, regardless of its roots, has been co-opted by the Republinuts. I find it funny for both sides. Both are engaging in the same behaviors they labeled as "bad" just a few years ago.

    The TP is no longer pure, but infected by Rep rhetoric and twisted to mean anti-Dem. True TPs should tell the Palins et al who have found it a convenient home to drudge up support for what otherwise would be a footnote in Republinut history "thanks but no thanks." Temporary support for your cause is NOT worth aligning yourselves with the likes of them.

  • ||

    Let your opinion be heard and get the Tea Party facts:

    http://teapartyrevolution.com/

  • ||

    I am really tired of the direction of debate in which the mass-media complex leads this country. Its been going on for generations. Goldwaters campaign was tanked because the media constantly played the attack-add by Johnson, featuring the A-bomb detonating after Goldwater hypothetically won the election. Funny how it turned out that Johnson was the war monger, not Goldwater. Racism? This whole debate is bullshit. Are some of these people in the tea-party not so keen on a leftist black president, who hangs ornaments on the White House Christmas tree with an apotheosizing image of Chairman Mao the communist dictator of China? Yes probably. Do some not like him because he is black, and just because of that? Maybe 3 or 4. But we are talking about 150 million plus so...so what. My question is why does the opposition give legitimacy to these scum bags by defending themselves against these attacks? It only helps their cause.

  • ||

    Americans are to dumb to fix this country. It will only get worse. Everyone is caught in the web of the Left-right paradigm. The consolidated mass media controls debate, therefore controlling pubic opinion. Seven hollywood studios control 90% of all movies released in the United States this controls the culture. These seven studios are owned by larger corporations such as GE, among others.
    Its sadly amusing to watch people debate false concerns, manufactured by those interested in changing the subject away from them. Everyone seems to just play along, whether they realize it or not.

  • Buck||

    My only disagreement with the column is that the comment about our President not being a "communist." Sure, he isn't a card-carrying member of any so-called party, but geeze, what other ideology comes closer to his?

  • ||

    Hey little sister what have you done
    Hey little sister who's the only one
    Hey little sister who's your superman
    Hey little sister who's the one you want
    Hey little sister shot gun

    It's a nice day to start again
    It's a nice day for a white wedding
    It's a nice day to start again...

  • ||

    truth,,,,obama people have no idea of the extent to which they have to be gulled in order to be led."
    "The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of the nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell a big one."
    "All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it. Therefore, the intellectual level of the propaganda must be lower the larger the number of people who are to be influenced by it."
    "Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise."pelosi don't see much future for the Americans ... it's a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social inequalities ...obama feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance ... everything about the behaviour of American society reveals that it's half Judaised, and the other half negrified. How can one expect a State like that to hold TOGTHER.They include the angry left wing bloggers who spread vicious lies and half-truths about their political adversaries... Those lies are then repeated by the duplicitous left wing media outlets who “discuss” the nonsense on air as if it has merit… The media's justification is apparently “because it's out there”, truth be damned. STOP THIS COMMUNIST OBAMA ,GOD HELP US ALL .THE COMMANDER ((GOD OPEN YOUR EYES)) stop the communist obama & pelosi.((open you eyes)) ,the commander

  • ||

  • ||

    Of course they are racist. They just woke up and found out it is not 1958 anymore and nobody gives a damn what these teapatsies have to say.

    Any group that would pick a jibbering moron like Sarah Palin as a member has about as much brains and potential as a carrot.

    Oh wait a carrot is smarter than Sarah and her troop of teaparty baboons.

    Obama is President and Sarah and John are a dumb and out of touch as they always were. Get over it.

    The best these losers can do is dress up in play soldier clothes and run around in the woods playing terrorist until the police take pity on them and lock them up.

  • ||

    Poor George, did we wake up cranky today? Tell mommy your not feeling well and go back to your basement and lie down.

  • ||

    Tish and Pish,

    The grass roots has always been considerably MORE racist than portrayed in the media. I think it is a mistake to portray this as an exclusively GOP habit, but I saw it when I lived up North and it's way worse down South. I regularly hear the 'n' word when I work on certain jobs down here in all-white areas, and I frequently hear whispers about my color when I work in non-white areas.

    There are a lot of people who don't like black people, and they vote for all parties. So it is foolish to say anti-Obama sentiment is totally non racist. If Michael Steel was the GOP president there would be racist Democrats against him.

  • jdb||

    This is very true, but I think it's a mistake to say that the "grass roots" as a whole is more racist than portrayed.

    It's probably more accurate to say that "people" are more racist than portrayed in the media. Most of us grow up thinking that the only kind of racism is the overt kind, like segregationism and racially-motivated violence. And it's not just "white" or "conservative" or "Southern" folk, either.

  • unclesmrgol||

    Assembling to nonviolently petition our elected officials becomes a Kristallnicht only to those who would prevent nonviolent petitioning of our elected officials.

    Welcome to the new world.

  • abercrombie milano||

    Examples, please. I heard plenty of those on the left claiming such things: 'How dare you question my patriotism'! I can't say I ever saw an example of anyone actually doing it. However, I'm sure you can come up with many actual examples. How about a few quotes from that RNC convention or from Fox News?

  • Scarpe Nike||

    is good

  • xiaoyang||

    Beer and wine kisumu 2 possess a small amount of methyl alcohol, also known as fuel line antifreeze along with cook oven fuel. It is just a harmless quantity in ale and wine beverage but when distilled atmbt sapatu the wrong temp a dangerous amount of methyl alchol can be done.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement