Why we're talking about race - again

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=690926
The Democrats have lost the healthcare debate.

For months now, polls have been showing that Americans don't want the massive new government controls, regulations, taxes, and spending that Democrats are pushing.

Latest Gallup polling shows 60 percent saying that President Barack Obama's proposal will not expand health coverage without raising taxes on middle-class Americans and without affecting the current quality of healthcare.



Forty-three percent approve of how Obama is handling healthcare and 52 percent disapprove.

You would be hard pressed to find a Democrat or Republican who does not agree that we can improve how we deliver healthcare.

So the logical conclusion we'd expect now from well-intentioned people would be that we go back to square one. We do what Obama promised but never did -- have a truly open, bi-partisan discussion, with all ideas are on the table, to generate the best possible product for the American people.

Why is this not happening? Because it's not about healthcare. It's about ideology.

Despite claims from our Democrat administration that it wants civility, it does not. It wants control.

This nation is already torn apart ideologically. In the last four months, we've witnessed two cold-blooded, ideologically motivated murders. An abortion doctor shot in a church, and a pro-life demonstrator murdered in a drive-by shooting in front of a school.

There are fewer and fewer "self evident truths" about which we all agree.

The current charade to paint ideological differences with our president as racially motivated dangerously pours gasoline on the burning embers of our differences.

But this is what Democrats want. They have lost the healthcare debate on substance, so they want to make it emotional. They want to intimidate. And nothing intimidates and polarizes like race.

Continued at the link:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=690926

Conservatives use liberal playbook

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27285.html
Conservatives are coming for Democrats on their blind side -- the left.

The Wrong Side of History

The all-white crowd gathered round, seething with anger about change, which they felt was being shoved down their throats.

Some pumped demoralizing signs into the air, others shouted down anybody they didn’t feel were on their side. It didn’t take long for the name-calling and insults to commence.

“Somebody started yelling. Lynch her! Lynch her! I tried to see a friendly face somewhere in the crowd — someone who maybe could help. I looked into the face of an old woman and it seemed a kind face, but when I looked at her again, she spat on me.”

These are the words of Elizabeth Eckford. She is not talking about town hall protesters or tea baggers. Eckford, one of nine black students to integrate Central High School in Little Rock, Ark., was recalling how hundreds of white protesters — with backing from powerful politicians — tried to block her and eight other children from entering a public school in 1957.

They became known as the Little Rock Nine.

Protesters faced by the nine youths repeatedly warned that if blacks were allowed into “their schools” (much like the “their country” sentiment currently being echoed) it would harm their children.

It is ironic that thousands of angry, mostly white protesters converged on Washington last weekend at the same time I happened to be reading Cooper v. Aaron, a 1958 Supreme Court case stemming from the Little Rock Nine. The case is about Arkansas Democratic Gov. Orval Faubus and his refusal to obey federal orders to integrate the state’s schools. His defiance caused Republican President Dwight Eisenhower to send in federal troops to force Faubus to follow the law.

Chaos erupted. Vitriol and rowdy demonstrations spread not only throughout Arkansas, but across the country.

The nation was so polarized that it was nearly impossible for most people to foresee what many now take for granted: Integration would benefit the whole country, not just a particular demographic group.

We also now know that those screaming protesters were on the wrong side of history.

Some may ask what the Little Rock Nine story has to do with the current health care debate, especially when the apparent villain in the case was a Democrat and the hero, a Republican.

Here’s a clue: This column is not really about race. It’s about the way history repeats itself, and about our place in it.

Faubus’ opposition to allow black children to integrate Arkansas schools was politically motivated: He risked losing political support if he sanctioned integration, even though it was the right thing to do. Just like Republicans now risk losing political support if they show agreement with President Obama’s health care ideas — or any of his ideas, for that matter.

Click here to continue.

Readin', Ritin', Religion - Dear Leader wants Kids to Help him

Should students be required to help Obama?

YES

 

 3

NO

 

 0

Other (Explain)

 

 2

The nation's school bells are ringing, and our kids will soon be back in class -- passing notes, pulling pigtails, listening in rapt attention to Dear Substitute Teacher as he exhorts all students forward into the great patriotic educational struggle.

Being a big believer in recycling (and sloth), it seemed like a good excuse to trot out this moldy Iowahawk video from October 2008. 

White House Withdraws Call for Students to 'Help' Obama

 

President Obama's plan to speak to the nation's schoolchildren in a video address next week erupted into controversy as critics claimed he was trying to indoctrinate America's kids.

The Obama administration is rethinking its course recommendations for students ahead of President Obama's address to the the nation's schoolchildren next week, rewriting its suggestions to teachers for student assignments on how to "help the president."

White House aides said the language was supposed to be an inspirational, pro-education message to America's youths, but its unintended consequences were evident.

Among the activities initially suggested for pre-K to 6th grade students was to "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president."

Another assignment for students after hearing the speech was to discuss what "the president wants us to do." 

The suggestion about writing letters has since been changed to: "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."

White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said the changes to the language are intended to make the lesson plans clearer. He added that the speech is not a policy speech, but is intended to encourage kids to work hard and commit to school. 

The speech is "about the value of education and the importance of staying in school as part of his effort to dramatically cut the dropout rate," Vietor said.

The Washington Times was first to report Thursday that the plan was being reconsidered. Presidential aides also acknowledged to the newspaper that they helped the U.S. Education Department write the suggested assignments, which stirred criticism by many who say Obama is trying to indoctrinate the education system.

Christina Erland Culver, former deputy assistant secretary for education, said presidents have traditionally addressed classrooms on the first day of school, but the problem with the event was the accompanying materials from the Department of Education.

"That's where they kind of got into a slippery spot. Federal statute denies any authority to the Department of Education to provide any kind of curriculum or anything that can be passed down to the state, and that's part of the statute forming the Department of Education. So they kinda got themselves into this mess because they didn't really understand some of the key legal roles or the dos and don'ts at the federal Department of Ed," she said. 

A White House blog posted Thursday, accompanied by two Web videos on the importance of education, said Obama would use his address to "urge students to take personal responsibility for their own education."

Click here to read the Washington Times article. 

Flashback 1991: Gephardt Called Bush's Speech to Students 'Paid Political Advertising'

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
September 3, 2009 - 10:45 ET

 

As Barack Obama prepares a nationwide broadcast to America's students next Tuesday, it has been revealed that Democrats complained in 1991 when then President George H. W. Bush broadcast a speech from a Northwest Washington junior high school.

In fact, the House Majority leader at the time, Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), said "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students."

Such was reported by the Washington Post on October 3, 1991 (h/t KY3 Political Notebook via Chuck Todd):

House Democrats criticized President Bush yesterday for using Education Department funds to produce and broadcast a speech that he made Tuesday at a Northwest Washington junior high school.

The Democratic critics accused Bush of turning government money for education to his own political use, namely, an ongoing effort to inoculate himself against their charges of inattention to domestic issues. The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.

 

American Thinker

http://www.americanthinker.com/
American Thinker is a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism, and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda.

There is no limit to the topics appearing on American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions, strategic, economic, diplomatic, and military is emphasized. The right to exist and the survival of the State of Israel are of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, and economics in their practical and ethical dimensions are also emphasized, as is the state of American culture.

Staff

Editor and publisher Thomas Lifson

News editor Ed Lasky

Chief political correspondent Richard Baehr

Chief investigative correspondent Clarice Feldman

Submissions editor Larrey Anderson

Deputy editor Mike Lee

Consulting editor J.R. Dunn

Race Card

When the left uses the Race Card does it help or hurt Obama's presidency?

Helps

 

 0

Hurts

 

 3

Other

 

 4

Garofalo: Tea Party Protesters 'Functionally Retarded Adults'; Says 'I Want My Country Back' Code for 'I Want My White Guy Back'

By Jeff Poor | August 22, 2009 - 16:53

You probably already knew Jeanane Garofalo was no fan of conservatives, Republicans or just about anything that could be described as right of center. But the former Air America host and MSNBC regular really has a low regard for conservative activists.

In an appearance at the 9:30 Club in Washington, D.C. on Aug. 21, Garofalo ripped into tea party protesters, or what some of the wizards of smart on the left have deemed "tea baggers" calling them "functionally retarded adults" and "racists."

"Do you remember tea baggers?" Garofalo said. "It was just so much easier when we could just call them racists. I just don't know why we can't call them racists, or functionally retarded adults."

Gov. David Paterson blames calls for him to step aside on race

By Kenneth Lovett
Daily News Albany Bureau Chief

 

New York Governor David Paterson

"The whole idea is to get me not to run in the primary," Paterson complained on a morning radio show hosted by Daily News columnist Errol Louis.

He suggested that Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, the country's only other African-American governor, also is under fire because of his race.

"We're not in the post-racial period," Paterson said.

"The reality is the next victim on the list - and you can see it coming - is President Barack Obama, who did nothing more than trying to reform a health care system."

Cynthia Tucker: 45-65% Of Townhall Protesters Are Racists

Are you opposed to ObamaCare?  Willing to attend a town hall to express your disapproval?  Odds are good you're a racist.  Just ask Cynthia Tucker . . .

As Clay Waters has noted, Paul Krugman alleges that racist motives are at the heart of the town hall protests against ObamaCare.  On this evening's Hardball, Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution was willing to get specific, estimating that "45 to 65%" of the protesters are motivated by racism.

View video here.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Put 100 of these people in a room. Strap them into gurneys.  Inject them with sodium pentathol. How many of them would say "I don't like the idea of having a black president"? What percentage?

CYNTHIA TUCKER: Oh, I'm just guessing. This is just off the cuff. I think 45 to 65% of the people who appear at these groups are people who will never be comfortable with the idea of a black president.

Paul Krugman Sees Racism Among Town Hall 'Mob' Protesters

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is not pleased with some of his fellow racist mobs -- er, U.S. citizens -- as he demonstrated in his column on Friday, "The Town Hall Mob," on loud protests that have met some Democratic congressmen who support Obama's costly health care ideas.

There's a famous Norman Rockwell painting titled "Freedom of Speech," depicting an idealized American town meeting. The painting, part of a series illustrating F.D.R.'s "Four Freedoms," shows an ordinary citizen expressing an unpopular opinion. His neighbors obviously don't like what he's saying, but they're letting him speak his mind.

That's a far cry from what has been happening at recent town halls, where angry protesters -- some of them, with no apparent sense of irony, shouting "This is America!" -- have been drowning out, and in some cases threatening, members of Congress trying to talk about health reform.

MSNBC Anchor: ''Socialist' Is Becoming the New N-word'

Did you know that when you refer to someone as a socialist, you're really calling them the N-word?

Such an astonishing hypothesis was offered by MSNBC's Carlos Watson Monday in a segment he refers to as "The 'C' Note."

Potentially even more shocking, after Watson offered this seemingly absurd opinion, Mort Zuckerman actually agreed with him (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript, h/t HotAirPundit): 

Today I want to talk about a word that we're hearing more and more, and that's the word socialist. You hear it from a lot of conservatives these days, that's usually critiquing the President, or more broadly Democrats. And while that's certainly a legitimate critique, there certainly is an ideology that can and should be critiqued at certain times, it also some times is just a kind of a generic conservative bludgeoning tool. And that's alright, too, because you hear it on the Democratic side as well: rightwingnut, what have you.

But what concerns me is when in some of those town hall meetings including the one that we saw in Missouri recently where there were jokes made about lynching, etc., you start to wonder whether in fact the word socialist is becoming a code word, whether or not socialist is becoming the new N-word for frankly for some angry upset birthers and others. I hope that's not the case, but it sure does say to you what David Brooks said the other day on T.V. which is that more credible conservatives have to stand up and say that there's a line that has to be drawn, that there's a line of responsibility that's important, and that extends to the words that we choose including how choose even legitimate words like socialist.

What? 

So now that we have a black president, words that have been used in our country for decades -- words that have real meaning -- suddenly stand for something else altogether that includes a racial overtone?

What kind of nonsense is this? 

Are we headed to a point in our history when any criticism about this president will be deemed racist?

Exit questions: is this really the change people wanted; where does it all end; where has America gone, and; how did this all happen in just six months?

As a post facto aside, I sincerely hope my parents didn't see Watson's "'C' Note" because I've been calling them socialists for years! :-)

Olbermann: Fox News Watchers Are Paranoids and Racists

By Noel Sheppard | August 26, 2009 - 00:14

Did you know that Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" on MSNBC is the highest rated news program on cable?

You didn't?

Well, it is according to Keith Olbermann.

Honestly.

Even worse, in his view, folks that watch Fox News are "tin foil hatters, conspiracy theorists, paranoids and racists."

He said so Tuesday evening, so it must be true (video embedded below the fold, relevant section at 0:52, h/t NBer Brad90956):

During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama’s supporters promised that his election would allow America to “transcend race."  Among the headlines:

The Boston Globe: "Obama shows an ability to transcend race”

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution:  “Obama's success suggests we can transcend race”

The Coming Liberal Suicide

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-08-20/the-coming-liberal-suicide/?cid=hp:featureline
As Democrats blast Obama over the public option, they risk destroying the policy they’ve been hoping for for years.