Robert Gibbs and Tom Vilsak have apologized to Shirley Sherrod. Tom offered her a new job. How did this happen? As I wrote yesterday morning:
Seriously - the idea that the Democratic administration would take Andrew Breitbart and Fox News seriously asSOURCESis offensive and terribly disappointing.
Last night Ed Schulz did a segment on how this happened: his poll question asked whether the White House was afraid of Fox News. He contended it was, and that the WH didn't pay enough attention to the progressive media base. He intimated that all Democrats should refuse to go on Fox.
I think there's some truth to what he says but I disagree that "afraid" is the emotion. I actually would use the term "appeasement". Fox made a big deal last year of saying they would cease lying, and would correct any on-air errors. That lasted a New York second or two and they went right back to twisting the news and outright lying, as was the case with Shirley Sherrod. I don't understand how people believe them, and really hope that the take-away lesson from this for the administration is to use actual sources the next time Fox tries this. And you know they will, since the White House and DoAg fell for it so easily.
It's nice to know where people stand, and I hope the Obama administration comes to the realization that Fox and company stand to destroy Obama, the administration, all Democrats and well, everyone who isn't them. Which brings me to Michele: founder of the new Tea Party Caucus.
I support the Caucus. I LOVE the Caucus. I hope they get a lot of members. I hope they publish a loyalty oath and make people sign it: expulsion to those who vote again the teabags. I want to see them get uniforms: my personal favourite would be leftover sheets with jackboots, but that's just me. I want them to proudly vote against everything, and that includes funding war and tax cuts for the rich and bailouts for Wall Street. EVERYTHING. I then want to see what the 3% (or so) of the remaining "old guard" Republicans do - give in? join them? denounce them? Like Mike Steele has said on more than one occasion: "This is not your father's Republican Party." The tea bags truly aren't -- let them show it as loudly as possible. And maybe THEN the Administration will realize that Fox, and Breitbart, and the teabaggers truly are the enemy, and need to be treated as such.
Remember how they have "such a crime problem" that they needed to pass legislation so that the police could stop people just because of the colour of their skin? Remember that one of the big pushes for this came from Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, racist in chief? Arpaio is the model for the new law. He's also under Federal indictment, but that's old news.
Stats are out -- seems that crime has fallen everywhere in Arizona EXCEPT in Maricopa County, where it has risen over the decade by 58%. If you use the "full" button on the bottom of the doc, you'll be able to clearly see the chart.
Yesterday, the NAACP passed a resolution calling on the Teabaggers to repudiate the racist element and activities within the tea party. The final language will be released after the national board of directors approves it at their October meeting.
Today, Fox Noise, Drudge and the rest of their ilk will be out with their analysis which will surely say that the NAACP is wrong, the teabaggers are only interested in "tea" meaning "taxed enough already". Idiots. Don't believe me? Check this out.
I'm pleased that the NAACP stood up and called out the teabaggers for what they are, albeit saddened that they will have to wait three months to finalize the wording. It seems it could come much more quickly, as it is so simple a construct. There is no doubt that left unchecked, these folks would have at ethnic cleansing.
Because the electorate is fundamentally intellectually challenged, when they're polled, they seem to slightly prefer the racists to the Democrats 47% - 46% on a generic ballot. 51% to 43% they prefer racist control of Congress. Latest poll numbers here. This is what raises my hackles: 73% say they plan to vote in November. This is not a presidential year, and we know that turnout is historically less in non-presidential years. So, when was the last time that turnout was 73% or higher in a presidential year? 1896. Yes, really. Total aggregate turnout in 2006 was in the low 40's, with the high in Minnesota at 60% and the low in DC, Louisiana and Mississippi at about 29%.
I've written at length (some would say ad infinitum) about why the co-opting of the IIE by the teabaggers is completely racist. And I understand why so many middle aged and senior white people (especially those with moderate incomes and less than a college education) cling tenaciously to a world that no longer exists. These are the same people who, in 2008, used the adjective "uppity" to refer to our President. The same people who think Jan Brewer is right, gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, and that the unemployed are lazy. The same folks who won't give up THEIR social security, but think everyone else should.
The question to me is whether they actually will vote in November, and whether or not we can rally our side to the polls. 73% of them aren't going to polls, but neither are 73% of us. As always, PLEASE do your part!
But there is a huge difference between what Rand Paul believes, and what most of the teabaggers are up for. Rand Paul grew up the son of Ron Paul, who is a registered Republican, but a Libertarian at heart. As per usual, it's in the platform:
As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.
We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized. [...]
We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.
Rand says he abhors racism, and I believe him. Not because I've ever met him, but because I know a lot of Libertarians. Their belief of individual rights is absolute. It's why true Libertarians believe in gay marriage, in the decriminalization of drugs, gun ownership and are pro-choice. The idea on the social issues is that it's a personal choice. You could therefore have a true Libertarian who is personally a pacifist, and would never pick up a gun, and would be a conscientious objector, but still believes that anyone who wants to should have the right to carry a gun. It seems incongruous, but their ethos carries.
The problem is that most people don't understand the fine line distinction. Especially when you are dealing with the teabaggers who are used to being Republicans and therefore following a party line without any intellectual consideration. The teabaggers who really ARE homophobic, anti-Semitic, misogynistic, knuckle-dragging, racists, and who will look for anything to cling to which on the surface seems to support their inherent hatred. For them, Dr. Paul is an icon around whom to rally.
Libertarians often have this problem of people not truly understanding what they mean. I had a conversation with Michael Badnarik in 2004, when he was running for president on the Libertarian ticket. He and some supporters happened to be in the local brewery where the Kerry campaign was holding a Meet-Up. Odd as it seems, Badnarik and company just happened to be having dinner there. I went over to say hello, and said that I had read the Constitution (which is a common question Libertarians like to ask). He asked if I knew how many amendments there were, and when I knew the right answer, and could list them, he asked me to join them. I asked the questions I ask of all Libertarians: why do you NOT want supporters who haven't read the Constitution? Why won't you ever talk in sound bites? Don't you want to win? Badnarik said that he felt understanding the Constitution was so important that he would rather lose with a handful of votes then have supporters who didn't know why they supported him. Honest, a common Libertarian problem.
But Paul has set himself out as a teabagging Republican, and from a liberal perspective, this lack of nuance on the part of Dr. Paul is a good thing: it allows us to drive home the relationship between Paul and the teabaggers and the hatred we find reprehensible. It may not make any difference in the outcome of the Senate race in Kentucky, although he may have to drop out of the race if he can't find a way to explain the nuances and differences in a way that people understand.
On a national level, having a prominent Senate candidate like Paul is very helpful. It allows us in blue and purple states to tie "one of their own" to the idea that it's okay to discriminate against blacks, women, and people with disabilities. It enables us to ask people flat out, during political conversations, whether they personally are racists and would like to see a nation with "white" and "coloured" water fountains. A world where people in wheelchairs are denied access because they cannot walk up the stairs. Rand Paul, and candidates like him, decrease the number of midterm seats we lose.
It looks like it might well be. The whip counts all indicate that the House is fewer than 10 votes away from passage of the Senate bill.
I have been oddly disconnected from this last, intense week, taken up as I am with "life things" that preclude the minute-by-minute I'd like to be spending engrossed in the politics of the battle. But I know that if the vote is called today, it will pass. It may be delayed if it cannot pass, but I would be incredibly surprised if it was called without a solid whip count of passage.
There are two things that strike me about the politics of the overall battle. First, while the Democratic leadership and the Obama administration have not done everything right in terms of process and message, they have never given up. As Tom Petty says:
Well I won't back down, no I won't back down
You can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won't back down
Gonna stand my ground, won't be turned around
And I'll keep this world from draggin' me down
Gonna stand my ground and I won't back down
That willingness to push forward, in and of itself, counts. Really counts. Not only for health care, but also for other major agenda items going forward, especially if both the leadership and the administration learn from their mistakes.
Secondly, I am convinced that the objections to health care reform is based on hatred. Whether Single Payer or the Public Option or the most minor of reforms included in the Senate bill, the objections are independent of the changes. Many people were surprised that the protesters at the Capitol yesterday yelled "faggot" at Barney Frank and "n****r" at John Lewis, and spat on Emanuel Cleaver. I had been expecting this, and worse, for some time now. From that first day at the Constitution Center last summer when Kathleen Sebelius and Arlen Specter were shouted down, and the crowd outside was rude, intolerant, and truly ugly.
There are senior citizens out there, angry that the government could serve as the insurance company of choice when they love the Medicare they have. People with no health insurance who would rather die than let a black person, or a gay person or anyone else who is not a white Christian have the potential opportunity to be insured. The entire leadership of the IIE, I am convinced, is opposed for no other reason than that passage will be historic, and they don't want oneiota of credit to go to President Obama, simply because his skin is darker than his. The IIE leadership and their minions therefore constructed a web of lies, beautifully packaged, and sold it to their constituency. A group willing to believe anything their leadership sold them, because they'd already accepted and embraced the lie of the place of President Obama's birth. Once you get your followers to abandon actual thought, the rest is easy. They'll eat anything you feed them.
As we move forward, any bill passed will certainly be amended and improved. Passage will help us hold both the House and the Senate this fall. And it is likely that the crop of new Senators and Reps will be more progressive than the incumbents they primary out in the spring and summer (I'm talking to you, Blanche...).
There's an old expression: "Give a man a fish and he eats for day. Teach him how to fish and he eats for a lifetime." Hungry people vote out incumbents. So, imagine if 10 million VOTERS who have not had health insurance for years, or ever, suddenly do. Think they'll support the people who tried to keep them from access to hypertension and diabetes medication, pap smears and mammograms? Health care is like food, a basic necessity.
The other thing to keep in mind as we move through primary season is the hatred. Are you non-white? Are you gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender? Are you not a Christian? Are you a woman not under the domination of a husband? Remember the Tea Party and most of the rest of the IIE HATE you. If they cannot make you morph into one of their pea pod people (rent the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers if you don't catch the reference) they wish you great harm. By the way, if you are a white Christian who doesn't believe their pablum, they don't consider you a "real" Christian.
And so, on with today. An historic Sunday vote. Then on to the next step. The fight for basic rights for ALL Americans. Health care for all. The fight against bigotry, racism, misogyny, and other forms of hatred and discrimination. I for one stand with my party: and if my leadership won't back down, I won't either.
And please, if you live in the district of a wavering Democratic Rep -- get on the phone....you know the drill.
Good morning, and welcome to a great tale of someone getting what they deserve.
You may remember back in the summer when the Valley Club was terribly unkind to children swimming in their pool who were not white. If not, you can catch up, in order, here, here, here and here.
The Valley Club is filing for bankruptcy. That won't get them out of on-going (Federal) Justice Department investigation, and they're still going to have to pay the (State) Human Relations Commission a $50,000 civil penalty for race discrimination. The bankruptcy court will decide if the suits from the children's parents will be allowed to proceed.
The really fun thing here is that they knew they had money problems, which was what caused the Board to set up a deal with the Creative Steps Summer Day Camp (and others) to USE their pool for a fee. In the case of Creative Steps, that was $1,950 for a one-a-week swim day for the campers.
So let's recap: white people have money problems. Try to cut a deal with minority group. Are rude and nasty to little kids. People protest. Charges are files. Club goes bankrupt. The sole thing that could make this even more perfect would be if, in bankruptcy court, the club itself was sold to a consortium which turned it into a swim club where all people were welcome.
President Carter spoke eloquently. There is no doubt that he is correct.
I'm hoping that President Carter's comments lead to a legitimate discussion and condemnation of not just racism, but the misogyny, homophobia, Anti-Semitism and other bigotries that afflict so many Americans Republicans.
I listened last night to some of the right wingnut talking heads explaining how it wasn't really racism, it was a true objection to "their country" being sold out from under them. Funny, all of the wingnuts seem to be white folks. Mostly men. One of them said Carter's comments were surprising, since none of this came up during the campaign.
Idiot.
I remember being called names because I was doing voter registration for the Obama campaign. Generally two words, the first starting with an "N" and the second being "lover". I heard candidate Obama referred to as "boy". I heard the term "the coloreds". Appalling.
It was no better in terms of what was said about Hillary Clinton: as if it is the "duty" of women to be subservient to their husbands, only allowed to stay home and raise kids. As if women should not be allowed to have thoughts of their own, much less elective office.
Now, this is America, and we have the first amendment, and people therefore have the freedom of speech. And I believe that's a good thing, right up until it crosses the line into incitement to riot, physical threats, and treason. There is nothing to be done about people who are small minded bigots, except to call them what they are.
It goes back to the discussion of what it really means to be a Democrat, and to believe in the Party Platform. If you're a long time reader, you know that I'm a proud, liberal Democrat. NOT because someone told me to, but because after a lot of thought and reason, I know that this is the tent in which I belong. The big tent, the one that fights for what is truly morally correct, for the betterment of all. Regardless of colour, creed, gender, sexual orientation, or country of origin. You know what's coming:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
It's time to stand up again - be PROUD to be a liberal. To say to the wingnuts: NO, not this time. We know you for what you are, with your unnatural attraction for a world that thankfully died many years ago de jure, and now must die for ever de facto.
Our President, the leader of our party, the leader of the free world, in his speech to Congress last week said that we will call you out when you lie. I stand proudly with my president. I stand proudly with my retired President Carter. I am Spartacus.
[T]he staff at Girard College, a private Philadelphia boarding school for children who live in low-income and single parent homes, stepped in and offered their pool.
"We had to help," said Girard College director of Admissions Tamara Leclair. "Every child deserves an incredible summer camp experience."
The school already serves 500 campers of its own, but felt they could squeeze in 65 more – especially since the pool is vacant on the day the Creative Steps had originally planned to swim at Valley Swim Club.
Next, Arlen Specter has launched an investigation. In a statement, he said:
The allegations against the swim club as they are reported are extremely disturbing. I am reaching out to the parties involved to ascertain the facts. Racial discrimination has no place in America today.
The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission will immediately investigate, chairman Stephen A. Glassman said Thursday.
Allegedly, this group was denied the use of a pool based on their race," Glassman said. "If the allegations prove to be true, this is illegal discrimination in Pennsylvania.
Yesterday, I couldn't say much more than "appalled" because the idea of harming children (physically, emotionally, in any way) makes me more sad than words can say. This incident also brought up ugly memories which I haven't thought about in years.
When I was in college, South Boston had to integrate its schools. A group called Restore Our Alienated Rights (ROAR) was formed to keep black children out of ostensibly white schools. They held big rallies and made the papers, but quietly, groups of them liked to go to the schools, and when the buses arrived, pelt the children with rocks. "Normal" people, myself included, would don helmets and thick coats and we'd help shield the kids from the buses to the buildings. ROAR didn't last long, but it was horrible. You may think this was the 1940's, but it was the '70's.
I was so thrilled today to see the new pool location, the governmental action, and even the grassroots work (there are message boards, Facebook pages, and there was a protest at the racist club yesterday afternoon.)
It gives me honest hope that SOMEDAY racism, and all other forms of bigotry will die.
I report with great personal sadness that in the city that brought us the Continental Congress, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, racism is still alive and well.
The Creative Steps Day Camp paid more than $1900 to The Valley Swim Club. The Valley Swim Club is a private club that advertises open membership. But the campers' first visit to the pool suggested otherwise.
"When the minority children got in the pool all of the Caucasian children immediately exited the pool," Horace Gibson, parent of a day camp child, wrote in an email. "The pool attendants came and told the black children that they did not allow minorities in the club and needed the children to leave immediately." [...]
"There was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion … and the atmosphere of the club," John Duesler, President of The Valley Swim Club said in a statement.
I had thought these days were gone. This is appalling in ways I cannot even verbalize.
