Posts categorized "Barak Obama"

April 28, 2008

Look how cute, the bigots cry racism...

Leave it to Shiksa Malkin to once-again stand-up against racism - something she only does when she can actually distort what is being said by anyone left-leaning in order to then use those paid-for talking points to help the GOP machine. Here is what Malkin writes this morning about Rev. Wright's speech:

"Good morning, people. I’ll be on Fox and Friends at around 8:15am to talk politics. Today’s engine-starter is The American Digest’s post on Jeremiah Wright’s racial brain theories.Do you remember nutball racialist professor Leonard (Blacks are “sun people,” whites are “ice people.”) Jeffries?
<snip>
As I noted yesterday, Wright acted out the differences between black and white marching bands.
<snip>
If he’s this comfortable mocking black/white differences in front of media cameras, I can only imagine what he says in private to his faithful black liberation ideology adherents."

Well Michelle proves finally what I have always suspected. The right-wing brain does not see complexity nor does it understand metaphor. It does, however, appear to hate rather well and so this sudden race to defend black America from a popular black pastor leaves me baffled.

After all, is this not the same bigot who argued in defense of Japanese concentration camps? Is this not the same bigot who routinely attacks Muslims and Islam? How very strange that this bigot would suddenly care about black America being insulted by what she now is trying to spin as racists slurs of a black minister. Quite simply put, what Malkin does not get is everything and what she is paid to parrot is garbage.

Let me just say what I got out Rev. Wright's speech. What Malkin points to as white-left brain theory is really what is generally referred to those who study the brain as creativity and emotion vs. logic and how the brain controls both. To say someone is creative is not to say they are unintelligent. By the same token to say that someone is logical does not make them intelligent. But Wright is NOT talking about intelligence in this regard.

Wright is appearing to use this as a metaphor to emphasize how the culture of the American black community is one of storytelling and song from a slave-history in which those were the only tools of expression and documentation available to an enslaved people. He discusses how those traditions have been attacked as  matters of intelligence, when they are in fact matters of culture.

Why is that so difficult to understand for Shiksa and the other brain-dead that walk among us? What Wright appears to be saying is that the Euro-centric way of speaking and expression is acceptable no matter how crude, illogical or how un-artistic, while the black-centric way of speaking and expression is seen as a deficiency that must be remedied, even if not remotely crude and entirely logical and artistic.

He shows how an opera singer conveys story through song and also how stories are expressed in black folk music and blues. In other words, what Wright is saying is that the black culture is itself being judged as deficient by a society that views intelligence not based on culture, but on test scores. Now does that sound remotely racist to anyone with any sense? No, it only sounds racist to a bigot.

I urge you to watch the speech in its entirety and not just the snips culled for sale by paid propagandists.

Now for another example of bigots running to defend black America. This one is from the mental-all-star Ed Morrissey:

"This sounds oddly similar to claims made in The Bell Curve by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein, a book that created a firestorm of controversy with claims that race made a difference in IQ scores, among other claims. The two authors got reviled as racist enablers and their work became denigrated among a wide swath of researchers for seriously overreaching the science on which they relied for their conclusions. Bob Herbert wrote in the New York Times that The Bell Curve was “a scabrous piece of racial pornography masquerading as serious scholarship,” and that the book was “just a genteel way of calling somebody a n****r.” The American Psychological Association dismissed the racial differences hypothesized as “unsupported”."

Now see, this is really interesting. I have read the Bell Curve - because I had to for a debate class in which I argued against its assertions (which were not all that difficult to debunk). The fact that Morrissey can compare Rev. Wright's metaphor to the racist drivel of the Bell Curve indicates that Morrissey has never read the book, but simply Googled around for something "intelligent" to say.

The Bell Curve argued that certain "races" (as though the human race is actually a variety of different species or something equally idiotic and bigoted) were more intelligent than other races. The authors of this piece of shite were white "intellectuals" for starters, which made their message that much more offensive. More importantly, the authors, Charles Murray and Herrnstein are conservatives, with Murray as a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.  In other words, these fine bigots come from the same side of the bigotry isle as Ed Morrissey and Shiksa Malkin.

Unlike Rev. Wright, Murray and Herrnstein were not using metaphors.  They were claiming actual scientific proof of the intelligence of the various "races," based on so-called "scientific" studies they had conducted.   And what did they base their findings on? Well, they gave tests to immigrants, uneducated migrant workers, the poor, natives of various tribes, and university students and such (among the larger testing pool).

Do you think they tested black university students and white university students from the same type of socio-economic background as well as other similarities that would ensure that the research was not skewed toward a particular group of people or a particular definition of intelligence?

Nope. They tested highly educated whites against the same measurements they applied to uneducated blacks and from this they got the results they claim as proof.

In addition, cultures that had better educational models, like Japan, were identified as genetically and inherently  "more intelligent", as though the quality of the system of education had nothing to do with the level of intelligence measured subsequently. But even we take the quality of the education system of the equation and look simply at all poor people in the US, regardless of gender, "race" etc., would these authors have found a better testing method? No. Because they also don't seem to account for cultural variants.

When testing indigenous people of various African tribes, what types of "intelligence measuring" tools did they employ?  Right, the types of measurement tools that don't apply to the culture. In some cultures, for example,  the measurement standard for intelligence is in the ability of the person or group to organize the food supplies and resources for an entire tribe. In this country, we cannot seem to manage that even though we have all of the wealth and resources that should make such a task much easier.

Bell Curve does not make that distinction, Rev. Wright does.  In other words, Wright argues precisely against what the Bull Curve asserts. So how did Ed Morrissey happen to confuse this? Well, as I have said, he likely did not read the Bell Curve, but simply Googled for something inflammatory to use in his swift-boating of Rev. Wright.

Finally, why are bigots feeling so insulted by something that has nothing to do with them? Let the black community express their feelings on the matter. Shiksa Malkin tries to do this with topics related to Jews and Israel, despite her not being a Jew or a citizen of Israel. Why? How does this in any way affect you, Michelle? Oh wait, I forgot, they get paid to be part of the nationalistic swarm that is released to help swift-boat someone or something that their handlers fear.

February 24, 2008

Secret Service Denies Obama Security Lapse While MSM Plays Dumb and NBC Plays Dumber; Plus, A Reminder of Who Controls the SS

Posted Brad Jacobson

On Thursday, I wrote about a frightening lapse in security at Wednesday's Obama rally in Dallas. Reporter Jack Douglas Jr. of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram broke the story and has since written a follow-up, to which he updated yesterday. I noted on Thursday that the mainstream media (with the exception of UPI) had completely ignored this story, which has largely continued, with the Associated Press going so far as to publish an article Friday titled "Many Blacks Worry About Obama's Safety" yet without referencing in the piece what had occurred at Wednesday's Dallas rally. Friday's broadcast of NBC Nightly News did mention an alleged breach of security, but the report - a shoddy piece of journalism driven solely by the Secret Service's official denial - was summarily tacked on to the end of a separate report on the Obama campaign. Additionally, in comments left on Douglas' articles on the Star-Telegram's website (one of which he published in his follow-up) and other sites around the web, people have provided firsthand accounts of the same type of lax security at Obama rallies throughout the country (yes, they need to be corroborated, but they reveal a pattern of lax security that also demands further investigation into this matter).

First, an exploration of the insufficient Secret Service response to these charges, followed by the deplorable NBC Nightly News segment and then a brief reminder of who controls the Secret Service.

Secret Service Denies Security Lapse

Jack Douglas' follow-up includes the Secret Service's denial of any security breach:

"There were no security lapses at that venue," said Eric Zahren, a spokesman for the Secret Service in Washington. He added there was "no deviation" from the "comprehensive and layered" security plan, implemented in "very close cooperation with our law enforcement partners."

Zahren rebutted suggestions by several Dallas police officers at the rally who thought the Secret Service ordered a halt to the time-consuming weapons check because long lines were moving slowly, and many seats remained empty as time neared for Obama to appear.

"It was never a part of the plan at this particular venue to have each and every person in the crowd pass through the Magnetometer," said Zahren, referring to the device used to detect metal in clothing and bags.

So basic checks, the kind performed at any major sporting or music event, were never "part of the plan"? If such checks can be carried out for, say, 20,000 people at a Springsteen concert or 50,000 at a Yankee game, why is it too much to expect the same for our nation's leading Democratic presidential candidate?

Continue reading "Secret Service Denies Obama Security Lapse While MSM Plays Dumb and NBC Plays Dumber; Plus, A Reminder of Who Controls the SS" »

February 05, 2008

Clinton vs. Obama on the Cluster Bomb Vote

Posted by Brad Jacobson

(updated below - includes full text of Senate Amendment No. 4882; update II: copy of Senate Roll Call Votes.)

"[Cluster bombs are] the single greatest risk civilians face with regard to a current weapon that is in use." -Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch

David Rees, the man behind the hilarious and trenchant Get Your War On, reminded me yesterday of another especially egregious - yet much less known - vote cast by Senator Hillary Clinton, which no one in the mainstream media is talking about:

But in the autumn of 2006, there was a chance to take a step in the right direction: Senate Amendment No. 4882, an amendment to a Pentagon appropriations bill that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.

Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

Analysts say Clinton did not want to risk appearing "soft on terror," as it would have harmed her electibility.

No, neither candidate is perfect. Indeed, as Rees points out about Obama:

Nobody who voted for 2005's wack-ass energy bill is perfect. Nobody who voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act is perfect.

Yet he goes on to say:

But of the two remaining Democratic candidates, one decided her vote on Amendment No. 4882 according to a political calculation. The other used a moral calculation.

Whomever you're supporting, or even if you're not supporting either candidate, Rees makes a fair point here. On not one but two of her most important life-and-death votes in the Senate, Clinton embraced political expediency over the protection of innocent human lives.

Moreover, if such issues as the horrific realities of cluster bombs were given their due in the mainstream media, Clinton's vote against Amendment No. 4882 would've and should've been fair game in assessing her record.

The United States of America is the largest manufacturer of cluster bombs. This weaponry maims and kills thousands of innocent human beings globally each year but reaps huge profits for the defense industry, which in turn, of course, pays exorbitant rates to advertise during U.S. network news broadcasts.

Thus, its absence from our "national debate" is no grand mystery.

First, a brief background on the cluster bomb. Then, an exploration of why Senator Clinton's vote against its ban is highly relevant to President Clinton's actions back in 1997.

The Cluster Bomb

Nick Turse describes the ghastly nature of cluster bombs in his article "Did the U.S. Lie About Cluster Bomb Use in Iraq?":

Continue reading "Clinton vs. Obama on the Cluster Bomb Vote" »

Blooper Tuesday

Posted by Jeff Huber

I spent my week off playing tourist in my own back yard.  My brother in law Steve and I took a magical history tour of some of the significant sites and museums in the Hampton Roads area.  We had a lot of ground to cover in a relatively short period, but we had sufficient down time to catch the hoopla surrounding the run up to Super Tuesday. 

I was gratified to see that the news channels actually seemed to be fomenting more hype over the primary elections than even (gasp) the Super Bowl.  As fatigued as I become of the broadcast nattering networks' attempts to create mountains out of molecules, I'd far rather see them over-sensationalize the fate of the nation than a sporting event.

Continue reading "Blooper Tuesday" »

January 05, 2008

Bill O'Reilly lets his inner stalker shine...

Amazing, Bill O'Reilly is really the quintessential lone nut, angry, belligerent, and on the fringes of reality:

"NASHUA, N.H.-- Fox News host Bill O'Reilly got into a confrontation with an Obama aide after O'Reilly started screaming at him as he tried to get Barack Obama's attention following a rally here. O'Reilly eventually did chat briefly with Obama and asked him to be a guest on his show.

The incident was triggered when O'Reilly--with a Fox News crew shooting--was screaming at Obama National Trip Director Marvin Nicholson "Move" so he could get Obama's attention, according to several eyewitnesses. "O'Reilly was yelling at him, yelling at his face," a photographer shooting the scene said.

O'Reilly grabbed Nicholson's arm and shoved him, another eyewitness said. Nicholson, who is 6'8, said O'Reilly called him "low class."

"He grabbed me with both his hands here," Nicholson said, gesturing to his left arm and O'Reilly "started shoving me." Nicholson said, " He was pretty upset. He was yelling at me."

Secret Service agents who were nearby flanked O 'Reilly after he pushed Nicholson. They told O'Reilly he needed to calm down and get behind the fence-like barricade that contained the press."

I hope the Secret Service has BillO on a watch-list after this.;)

November 21, 2007

Hillary Hearts Hegemons?

Posted by Jeff Huber

"…Having been in Iraq, you know that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has assisted the militias and others in killing our Americans and in maiming them."

-- Hillary Clinton, to an Iraq War veteran at the Democratic presidential candidates' debate in Las Vegas, Nevada on November 16, 2007

As an ex-military man, I regard the '08 presidential race, to a large extent, as a cattle call audition for the role of commander in chief of America's military.  Since the GOP shows no sign of purging itself of the neoconservative influence, voting for a Republican would be an exercise in redefining insanity.  So I've been watching the Democratic race with great interest, and found the November 16 debate in Vegas most interesting.

Continue reading "Hillary Hearts Hegemons?" »

April 08, 2007

Why are they trying so hard...

I posted this over at Huffington Post today. I had not planned to comment on the Pelosi non-scandal, but given the amount of idiocy that has now engulfed our national media, I simply had to say something - albeit, still stuck in my sick bed. So here you go, for your digestive pleasure:

"The national media continues to self destruct under the weight of its politically purchased editorial pages. Not content to simply slink away quietly after leading the nation into a disastrous war of choice through negligent and even highly corrupt reporting practices, the editorial boards of all of the major newspapers - still apparently strapped collectively into a mission accomplished payola flight suit - continue to play political attack dog for their paymasters.

Continue reading "Why are they trying so hard..." »

February 11, 2007

On all of Murdoch's bigots

If you thought that Rupert Murdoch's propaganda machine churning out racism and fear tactics was limited to just his American stable of whores like Bill Liely or Neo-Nazi Barbie, Ann Coulter - think again.

The Murdoch owned Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, claims that Al-Qaeda wants Obama to win:

"I think that will just encourage those who want to completely destabilize and destroy Iraq, and create chaos and a victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory," Howard said on Nine Network television.

"If I were running al-Qaida in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and be praying as many times as possible for a victory, not only for Obama but also for the Democrats."

Amazing that Bush and Howard seem to know just exactly what Al Qaeda wants to see in US politics. One has to wonder how they know, given that they have yet to express an interest in Osama bin Laden.  Perhaps the authorities need to drag Howard in for interrogation and find out just what he knows about Al Qaeda's interests and how he knows what he claims?

I also wonder if Obama's skin color might be upsetting the bigots just a bit. I think it is, don't you?

Moderate Voice has a great take on this as well

My Photo

Piggy Bank

tip jar for AL

Tip Jar

Books by AL Writers

  • Larisa's upcoming...
  • Jeff Huber's Upcoming ...

Get at-Largely via Email

  • Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

Pictures from the muck

  • Pertyyyyyyyy
    Pictures of me working on various stories, of actual stories and locations, of random musings, of pure and total nonsense.

Help Support at-Largely

Reporters Under Attack

Raw Story News

Click, Click

BuzzFlash News

DAILY CARTOON click to enlarge
ANDERTOONS.COM ENTERTAINMENT CARTOONS

Categories