DABR Twitter Web Client Mini Blog Yo Mama Jokes Sports Bookmarklets About Us

May 19, 2010

How the First Black President’s Approach to Race Is Transforming What It Means to Be White | News & Politics | AlterNet



 

Very interesting article that I think helps explain the rampant Tea Partyism.

How the First Black President’s Approach to Race Is Transforming What It Means to Be White | News & Politics | AlterNet

By displaying all these tropes of traditional whiteness, Obama’s candidacy disrupted the very idea of whiteness. Suddenly whiteness was no longer about educational achievement, family stability or the command of spoken English. One might argue that the folksy interventions of Sarah Palin were a desperate attempt to reclaim and redefine whiteness as a gun-toting ordinariness that eschews traditional and elite markers of achievement.

Obama’s whiteness in this sense is frightening and strange for those invested in believing that racial categories are stable, meaningful and essential. Those who yearn for a postracial America hoped Obama had transcended blackness, but the real threat he poses to the American racial order is that he disrupts whiteness, because whiteness has been the identity that defines citizenship, access to privilege and the power to define national history.

In 1998 Toni Morrison wrote that Bill Clinton was the first “black president” because he “displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald’s-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas.” Ten years later the man who truly became America’s first black president displayed few of these tropes. Instead he was a scholarly, worldly, health food-eating man from Hawaii. In this sense, Obama was the white candidate in 2008, and a substantial portion of white voters preferred Obama’s version of whiteness to that of McCain and Palin.

Which brings us back to Obama’s Census choice. Despite his legitimate claims on whiteness, he chose to call himself black. As historian Nell Painter documents in her new book The History of White People, white identity was a heavily policed and protected border for most of American history. A person born to an African parent and a white parent could be legally enslaved in America until 1865. From 1877 until 1965 that person would have been subject to segregation in public accommodations, schools, housing and employment. In 1896 the Supreme Court established the doctrine of separate but equal in the case of Homer Plessy, a New Orleans Creole of color whose ancestry was only a small fraction African. President Obama’s Census self-identification was a moment of solidarity with these black people and a recognition that the legal and historical realities of race are definitive, that he would have been subject to all the same legal restrictions had he been born at another time. So in April, Obama did as he has done repeatedly in his adult life: he embraced blackness, with all its disprivilege, tumultuous history and disquieting symbolism. He did not deny his white parentage, but he acknowledged that in America, for those who also have African heritage, having a white parent has never meant becoming white.

.

Link

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: 1% [?]

February 22, 2010

“The GOP’s “small government” tea party fraud” by Glenn Greenwald – Salon.com



 

There’s a major political fraud underway:  the GOP is once again donning their libertarian, limited-government masks in order to re-invent itself and, more important, to co-opt the energy and passion of the Ron-Paul-faction that spawned and sustains the ”tea party” movement.  The Party that spat contempt at Paul during the Bush years and was diametrically opposed to most of his platform now pretends to share his views.  Standard-issue Republicans and Ron Paul libertarians are as incompatible as two factions can be — recall that the most celebrated right-wing moment of the 2008 presidential campaign was when Rudy Giuliani all but accused Paul of being an America-hating Terrorist-lover for daring to suggest that America’s conduct might contribute to Islamic radicalism — yet the Republicans, aided by the media, are pretending that this is one unified, harmonious, “small government” political movement.

The Right is petrified that this fraud will be exposed and is thus bending over backwards to sustain the myth.  Paul was not only invited to be a featured speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference but also won its presidential straw poll.  Sarah Palin endorsed Ron Paul’s son in the Kentucky Senate race.  National Review is lavishly praising Paul, while Ann Coulter “felt compelled [in her CPAC speech] to give a shout out to Paul-mania, saying she agreed with everything he stands for outside of foreign policy — a statement met with cheers.”  Glenn Beck — who literally cheered for the Wall Street bailout and Bush’s endlessly expanding surveillance state — now parades around as though he shares the libertarians’ contempt for them.  Red State’s Erick Erickson, defending the new so-called conservative “manifesto,” touts the need for Congress to be confined to the express powers of Article I, Section 8, all while lauding a GOP Congress that supported countless intrusive laws — from federalized restrictions on assisted suicide, marriage, gambling, abortion and drugs to intervention in Terri Schiavo’s end-of-life state court proceeding — nowhere to be found in that Constitutional clause.  With the GOP out of power, Fox News suddenly started featuring anti-government libertarians such as John Stossel and Reason Magazine commentators, whereas, when Bush was in power, there was no government power too expanded or limitless for Fox propagandists to praise.

This is what Republicans always do.  When in power, they massively expand the power of the state in every realm.  Deficit spending and the national debt skyrocket.  The National Security State is bloated beyond description through wars and occupations, while no limits are tolerated on the Surveillance State.  Then, when out of power, they suddenly pretend to re-discover their “small government principles.”  The very same Republicans who spent the 1990s vehemently opposing Bill Clinton’s Terrorism-justified attempts to expand government surveillance and executive authority then, once in power, presided over the largest expansion in history of those very same powers.  The last eight years of Republican rule was characterized by nothing other than endlessly expanded government power, even as they insisted — both before they were empowered and again now — that they are the standard-bearers of government restraint.

What makes this deceit particularly urgent for them now is that their only hope for re-branding and re-empowerment lies in a movement — the tea partiers — that has been (largely though not exclusively) dominated by libertarians, Paul followers, and other assorted idiosyncratic factions who are hostile to the GOP’s actual approach to governing.  This is a huge wedge waiting to be exposed — to explode — as the modern GOP establishment and the actual ”small-government” libertarians that fuel the tea party are fundamentally incompatible.  Right-wing mavens like Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin and National Review are suddenly feigning great respect for Ron Paul and like-minded activists because they’re eager that the sham will be maintained:  the blatant sham that the modern GOP and its movement conservatives are a coherent vehicle for those who believe in small government principles.  The only evidence of a passionate movement urging GOP resurgence is from people whose views are antithetical to that Party.  That’s the dirty secret which right-wing polemicists are desperately trying to keep suppressed. Credit to Mike Huckabee for acknowledging this core incompatibility by saying he would not attend CPAC because of its “increasing libertarianism.”

These fault lines began to emerge when Sarah Palin earlier this month delivered the keynote speech to the national tea party conference in Nashville, and stood there spitting out one platitude after the next which Paul-led libertarians despise:  from neoconservative war-loving dogma and veneration of Israel to glorification of “War on Terror” domestic powers and the need of the state to enforce Palin’s own religious and cultural values.  Neocons (who still overwhelmingly dominate the GOP) and Paul-led libertarians are arch enemies, and the social conservatives on whom the GOP depends are barely viewed with greater affection.  Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are about as far apart on most issues as one can get; the “tea party movement” can’t possibly be about supporting each of their worldviews.  Moreover, the GOP leadership is currently promising Wall Street even more loyal subservience than Democrats have given in exchange for support, thus bolstering the government/corporate axis which libertarians find so repugnant.  And Coulter’s manipulative claim that she “agrees with everything [Paul] stands for outside of foreign policy” is laughable; aside from the fact that “foreign policy” is a rather large issue in our political debates (Iraq, Israel, Afghanistan, Iran, Russia), they were on exactly the opposite sides of the most intense domestic controversies of the Bush era:  torture, military commissions, habeas corpus, Guantanamo, CIA secrecy, telecom immunity, and warrantless eavesdropping.  

Part of why this fraud has been sustainable thus far is that libertarians — like everyone who doesn’t view all politics through the mandated, distorting, suffocating Democrat v. GOP prism — are typically dismissed as loons and nuts, and are thus eager for any means of achieving mainstream acceptance.  Having the GOP embrace them is one way to achieve that (Karl Rove:  some ”see the tea party movement as a recruiting pool for volunteers for Ron Paul’s next presidential bid . . . . The Republican Party and the tea party movement have many common interests”).  Additionally, just as the Paul-faction of libertarians is in basic harmony with many progressives on issues of foreign policy and civil liberties, they do subscribe to the standard GOP rhetoric on domestic spending, social programs and the like.  

But that GOP limited government rhetoric is simply never matched by that Party’s conduct, especially when they wield power.  The very idea that a political party dominated by neocons, warmongers, surveillance fetishists, and privacy-hating social conservatives will be a party of “limited government” is absurd on its face.  There literally is no myth more transparent than the Republican Party’s claim to believe in restrained government power.  For that reason, it’s only a matter of time before the fundamental incompatibility of the “tea party movement” and the political party cynically exploiting it is exposed.

mmmmhmmmm

Posted via web

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: 1% [?]

February 18, 2010

[Dear Sarah: Say it is so, run for president - Leonard Pitts Jr. - MiamiHerald.com] awesome!

Filed under: Election, George Bush, Politics, Randomness, Republicans — Tags: , , , — webadmin @ 11:40 pm


 

Dear Sarah Palin:

I hear you’re pondering a run for the White House in 2012. Last week, you told Fox news it would be “absurd” to rule it out.

I’m writing to ask that you rule it in. I very badly want you to run for — and win — the Republican nomination for the presidency.

I know you’re waiting for the punch line. Maybe you figure I think you’d be a weak candidate who would pave the way for President Obama’s easy re-election.

That’s not it. No, I want you to run because I believe a Palin candidacy would force upon this country a desperately needed moment of truth. It would require us to finally decide what kind of America we want to be.

Mrs. Palin, you are an avatar of the shameless hypocrisy and cognitive disconnection that have driven our politics for the last decade, a process of stupidification creeping like kudzu over our national life.

As Exhibit A, consider your recent speech at a so-called “tea party” event, wherein you dismissed the president as a “charismatic guy with a teleprompter.” Bad enough you imply that teleprompter use is the mark of an insubstantial man, even though you and every other major politician uses them. But what made the comment truly jaw-dropping is that even as you spoke, you had penned on your left palm, clearly visible, a series of crib notes.

Mrs. Palin, if Obama is an idiot for reading a prepared speech off a teleprompter, what are you for reading notes you’ve inked on your hand like a school kid who failed to study for the big test?

In the Fox interview, you scored Obama for supposedly expecting Americans to “sit down and shut up” and accept his policies. But when asked when the president has ever said that, you couldn’t answer. Obama, you sputtered, has just been condescending with his “general persona.”

I found that a telling moment. See, ultimately what you represent is not conservatism. Heck, I suspect that somewhere, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan are spinning like helicopter rotors at the very idea.

No, you represent the latest iteration of an anti-intellectualism that periodically rises in the American character. There is, historically and persistently, a belief in us that y’all just can’t trust nobody who acts too smart or talks too good — in other words, somebody whose “general persona” indicates they may have once cracked a book or had a thought. Americans tend to believe common sense the exclusive province of humble folks without sheepskins on the wall or big words in their vocabularies.

I don’t mock those people. They are my parents, my family elders, members of my childhood church. I honor their native good sense, what mom called “mother wit.” But if it is insulting to condescend to them, it is equally insulting to mythologize them.

More to the point, something is wrong when we celebrate mental mediocrity like yours under the misapprehension that competence or, God forbid, intelligence, makes a person one of those “elites” — that’s a curse word now — lacking authenticity, compassion and common sense.

So no, this is not a clash of ideologies, but a clash between intelligence and its opposite. And I am tired of being asked to pretend stupid is a virtue. That’s why I’d welcome the moment of truth your campaign would bring. It would force us to decide once and for all whether we are permanently committed to the path of ignorance, of birthers, truthers and tea party incoherence you represent, or whether we will at last turn back from the cliff toward which we race.

If the latter, wonderful, God bless America. If the former, well, some of us can finally quit hoping the nation will return to its senses and plan accordingly. Either way, we need to know, and your candidacy would tell us. If you love this country, Mrs. Palin, you can do it no greater service.

Run, Sarah, run.

I want Sarah to run … AND win for the good of the country to see that STUPID PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE PUT IN CHARGE OF SHIT.

Posted via web

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: 1% [?]

December 18, 2009

FREEDOM EDEN: Top Ten Surprises, Sarah Palin Book

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , — webadmin @ 7:34 am


 
TOP TEN SURPRISES IN THE SARAH PALIN BOOK

10. Cover photo is actually Tina Fey

9. All proceeds from the book go toward a bitchin’ new snowmobile

8. Nearly had to pull out of campaign after spraining her winking muscle

7. Not interested in politics, is interested in joining “Dancing with the Stars”

6. Includes fantasy sequence where she beats Katie Couric with her own microphone

5. Someone’s got a crush on Jon Gosselin

4. It’s a science fiction romance about moody teenage vampires

3. Favorite website: YoubetchaTube

2. Includes Levi Johnston centerfold

1. Even Sarah doesn’t know what Todd does

Posted via web

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

August 24, 2009

Why we still need to fear Sarah Palin

Filed under: Politics, Republicans — Tags: , , , — webadmin @ 10:15 am


 

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

July 26, 2009

For Sarah Palin

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , — webadmin @ 12:59 pm


 

from @pourmecoffee

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

April 10, 2009

FREE BRISTOL PALIN dotcom



 

Everybody remembers when Sarah Palin abducted the tabloidless future of her pregnant and unmarried daughter Bristol (as well as boyfriend and baby-daddy Levi) by dragging her family and her issues with abstinence into the Presidential race, right? Well, after the baby was born she gave an interview to Greta Van Facelift on Fox News where it appeared she may have been coming into her own and escaping her mom’s political tractor beam when she started talking about how advocating an abstinence-only policy was not realistic.

Then Sarah ambushed the interview to the surprise of no one except Greta

Well apparently Levi has managed to escape the Palin compound and is now talking about the “relationship” to people like Tyra Banks along with his allegedly 1st-of-12 steps mother and Jolie-ish sister

Not sure about the “LEVI” tattoo on his sister’s arm, but whatever. That doesn’t make them “white trash” does it? I mean if these upstanding Tyra show guests are to be believed, why would Bristol call her boyfriend and baby daddy “White Trash?” What would that say about her – that she enjoyed the company of dumb men that looked up to her for her brains? Is this a family trait inherited from the first dude and the ambusher? Learned from her own family environment?

Nonsense!

What it means is that Bristol Palin is still being held hostage by the Palin 2012 machine – maybe even developing a case of Stockholm Syndrome. So I have started promoting a new campaign via commennt and signature:

FREE BRISTOL PALIN

and just for kicks i decided to see if that url was taken – and sure enough! There are three things you can always count on: death, taxes, and internet snarkiness:

Free Bristol » Blog Archive » Save Bristol?

I’ve stumbled across one person in America who isn’t worshipping Bristol’s fetus: a fellow named Doug Stanhope, who is offering her $25,000 to get an abortion.

fyi … Doug Stanhope was one of the dudes that took over for Kimmel and Corolla on The Man Show shortly before it was cancelled and was last seen working on Girls Gone Wild videos. Career arced!

FREE BRISTOL PALIN

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

March 11, 2009

Michael Steel: Double Agent?

Filed under: Politics, Republicans — Tags: , , , , — webadmin @ 1:48 am


 

it’s starting to look like it

Commentary: GOP becoming a cartoon – CNN.com

NEW YORK (CNN) — The Republican Party is becoming a cartoon.

Where to start?

Bobby Jindal: “I’m certainly not nearly as good of a speaker as Obama.” Good OF a speaker? How about not as good at eighth-grade grammar either. It’s embarrassing.

Sarah Palin? Billing the taxpayers for her kids to travel to official events the children weren’t even invited to? She finally agreed to pay back the state for that money she took.

Her per diem charges to the state in the amount of $17,000 while she was living at home instead of in the governor’s mansion? She has now agreed to pay the taxes owed on that money. Another tawdry grab at a few dollars that didn’t belong to her.

Michael Steele, the newly elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, down on his knees apologizing to the helium-filled poster boy of the conservative right? Pathetic.

If the Republicans are ever to emerge from the long dark night they have created for themselves it will have to be without pandering to the right wing nuts that comprise Rush Limbaugh’s radio audience. Didn’t they learn anything in the last election?

All of which is to say the GOP is blowing it big time. They were handed a golden opportunity to redeem themselves with the election of Barack Obama — a chance to line up and in unison condemn the evil their party put in the White House the previous eight years.

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

February 20, 2009

Sarah Palin Hates America

Filed under: MSNBC, Politics — Tags: , , , , , , , — webadmin @ 5:50 am


 

Why does Sarah Palin disrespect the American Flag? << Brilliant at Breakfast

This photo, used in a Newsweek article last year about Sarah Palin, appears on the 2009 Sarah Palin calendar, and was just lauded by Pat Buchanan on Morning Schmegegge as a demonstration of her patriotism:

United States Flag Code, Title 4, Chapter 1, Sec. 8(d):

The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery.

Why does Sarah Palin hate America? Why does she desecrate Our Flag?

Labels: 



the video

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

November 6, 2008

Red State Disbelief



 

Awesome. Check out the attempts to raionalize Obama’s victory.

RedState: Obama’s 2008 Victory in Perspective

It’s going to happen, and we all know it: after two close elections, some Democrats are going to claim that Obama’s margin of victory over John McCain was a large, overwhelming repudiation of the Republican party, and that it was possibly even a historical turning point of partisan political realignment.

There’s just one problem with that theory: It’s not true.

See the image to the right (and click for the full version): It’s a complicated chart, but it has a lot to say. On it are illustrated the popular vote and electoral vote victory margins of every Presidential election 1900-2008, assuming Obama gets North Carolina and McCain gets Missouri. This also only counts Republicans and Democrats, and third parties are ignored.

Also on the chart are the mean Popular Vote and Electoral Vote margins since World War II, that is, counting the 1948-2008 elections. From that we can see one fact right away: Obama’s victory is below average. We can also look at the tiny bars representing the 2000 and 2004 elections to see that comparing with those races is simply not any kind of standard to use when judging an election.

Eisenhower 1952 and 1956. Johnson 1964. Nixon 1972. Reagan 1980 and 1984. Those elections set the standard for a blowout. Obama? His win doesn’t look like those other Presidents I just listed. He’s just slightly below average, sorry.

So rest at ease, Republicans. Even if this win isn’t a fluke, it’s not a permanent game changer.

Right. And surely the closeness of the past 5 elections don’t show any kind of demographic or other change in America, or any movement in values. Or any refinement in campaigning techniques. Lets dismiss all of that and start comparing to Eisenhower because all things are equal in 2008 America and 1952 America (as Obama has just shown).

While this may not be a repudiation of everything the Republican Party says they stand for, this certainly is a repudiation of the Republican party we’ve come to know over the past 8 years including this past campaign.

BTW this site is also rounding up the names of people who are leaking about Sarah Palin’s foibles to try to blackmail them later, rather than admitting their mistake and acknowledging that she’s a dumb hick … i mean an ignorant hick. Cuz fleecing the alleged reformer GOPers for free clothes for the fam is not something a dumb person would do!

If this is the response of the Party – to court the ignorant and not deal with the issues in their platform – they will be down and out for a while to come.

Bookmark and Share Email This Print This PDF This Blog This Facebook Twiit Google Google Yahoo! Buzz Ping StumbleUpon LinkedIn MySpace

Popularity: unranked [?]

Powered by WordPress

Blog Information