Racism

The New York Times uses an Associate Press article titled, Federal immigration failures fuel state action.

Mark Krikorian is the expert quoted. He is from the "Pat Buchanan" school of mainstreamed white supremacist political lobbying. His employer, the "Center For Immigration Studies", is an alleged think tank that used to be the research arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

Even though it has been spun-off and allegedly separated from the more radical FAIR, the Southern Poverty Law Center still considers the Center For Immigration Studies part of the list of anti-immigrant hate groups created by John Tanton.

NOTA BENE from Liza : I am really excited to present Andrea Plaid, of The Cruel Secretary and Racialicious fame. I hope she makes cross-posting to our blog a habit.

By now, you’ve seen—and probably commented on--the latest cover.

The Washington Post’s and CNN’s Reliable Sources’ Howard Kurtz said: “I talked to the editor of The New Yorker, David Remnick, who tells me this is a satire, that they are making fun of all the rumors,” Kurtz added. (Source)

Bill Burton, The Obama campaign spokesperson, responded: “The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Senator Obama’s right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.” (Source)

Of course, people at Michelle Obama Watch, Daily Kos, Politico, and other blogs have expressed rightful and righteous outrage over the cover.

My current live-in partner, who works at the New Yorker, just couldn’t believe that so many people responded so angrily at the cover at the Daily Kos and other sites. He “wanted to see [my] reaction.” When I emphatically told him that I didn’t find it funny, he said, “You’re so angry.”

“Of course I’m angry. What do you expect? This is my reaction is to your employer doing something so racist.”

“I’m trying to have some fun here.”

Humph, you gotta love hipster bigotry.

Image by Pantone801, found at Flickr.com

This is so mindboggling it defies commentary. Up until the 1st of July of 2008, Nelson Mandela was considered a terrorist by the United States.

Bush Removes Nelson Mandela from Terror Watch List
By VOA News
01 July 2008

U.S. President George Bush Tuesday signed a bill that allows Nelson Mandela to enter the United States without special clearance.

The measure officially removes Mr. Mandela and his African National Congress from a U.S. terror watch list.

The former South African president may now visit the United States without the U.S. secretary of state having to certify that he is not a terrorist.

Mr. Mandela was placed on the list because of his work with the African National Congress (ANC), which fought to end white minority rule in South Africa.

Mr. Mandela spent 27 years in prison for his work with the ANC to fight apartheid rule in South Africa.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner turns 90 on July 18.

Un.

Be.

lievable.

This is what I would do if I had several thousand dollars to spare these days :

1. I would have wire clothes hangers, like the ones dry cleaning stores us, and I'd covered them in dark blue rice paper with the blue and logo of the McCain campaign.

2. The tag line under the logo? "I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned."

3. A second design option would have his fateful words about how he would change the Supreme Court of the United States with the judges like like Roberts and Alito or his dear friend Chief Rhenquist.

4. If I had more money, I'd hang a Supreme Court Justice looking robe from several hundreds of them and deliver them to each and every one of the high-profile Democrats, whereas politicians or funders, who are being assholes about supporting Obama.

Plain and simple message : You support McCain? Kiss equal rights for women away.

I would have subtitled this video "America's New Civil War".

From the production company :
The New York Times and the Washington Post have recently reported on the "System of Neglect," namely, the state of immigration detention center conditions. As told by her sister June Everett, watch the story of Sandra Kenley, a 52- year-old grandmother, who after living in the U.S. legally for 33 years, was subjected to these very conditions and died in immigration detention.

Fox News had Michelle Malkin on yesterday discussing some thing or another having to do with the dark-skinned Filipina's attacks and demonization of presumptive First Lady Michelle Obama. So what does the Fox News editorial team do during the conservative racist baiter's time on TV? They put a banner right under the news bit that read : "Outraged Liberals : Stop Picking on Obama's Baby Mama".

As Oliver Willis says quite correctly, why not call her a N***r and get it over and done with it? Why not just turn Fox News into what it really is, a race-baiter's dream machine?

Kevin Hayden says' the channel should be fined by the FCC a minimum of $325,000 for publishing hate speech. Even though I agree with Stefania this proves the extreme right is scared shitless at the prospect of seeing the Obamas in the White House, it's still utterly wrong and those bastards should pay every time they pull this shit.

Yet what's most important about all this mess is the other Michelle. La Malkin. Why do you think Fox News has on their payroll a dark-skinned Filipina who is not only their quite giddy and willing cover for the racist rants you pass as news, but also something of a news maker herself?

First off, I really want to know what kind of a hand-off Hillary Clinton promised to Ferraro if she became the nominee and eventual President of the United States. The woman has gone beyond the deep end with her one-woman Oppression Olympics. She is so determined to prove that the Democratic party is littered with women haters that she's hoodwinked some rich women to pay for a "study" that'll prove her point :

In response, a group of women - from corporate executives to academics to members of the media - have requested that the Shorenstein Center at Harvard University and others conduct a study, which we will pay for if necessary, to determine three things.

First, whether either the Clinton or Obama campaign engaged in sexism and racism; second, whether the media treated Clinton fairly or unfairly; and third whether certain members of the media crossed an ethical line when they changed the definition of journalist from reporter and commentator to strategist and promoter of a candidate. And if they did to suggest ethical guidelines which the industry might adopt.

First off, even though I don't agree with her some of her itemizations, Melissa McEwan has the sexism in the media covered. Yet I think it was either Gallup, Rassmussen or Pew who did already studies about whether the candidates have been treated fairly by the media. Guess who actually gets more passes by the media than other candidates? Racism? Oh lord, just go to Baratunde's wiki, please. And last, what a fucking straw man. Hello, let's page Jay Rosen, so he can school you in one or two things about journalism, especially what journalists are really all about.

Here's what I want to know from Geraldine Ferraro, who was in Clinton's finance committe : Where did most of the $100 million go?

Yesterday I wrote the following about Hillary Rodham Clinton :

Shameless.

Despicable.

Unfit to be President of the United States.

My words hit the front pages of both Daily Kos and The Moderate Voice. By evening Keith Olbermann had the following to say about Hillary Clinton's latest "gaffe" :

The most important part of the transcript is after the jump :

Shameless.

Despicable.

Unfit to be President Of The United States.

As it appears reported in the New York Post

Hillary Clinton today brought up the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to stay in the race against Barack Obama.

"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it," she said, dismissing calls to drop out

To this blogger, Hillary Clinton has waged a campaign on bringing out the inner white supremacist out of many Americans who are frothing at the mouth over the prospect of having to vote for a black man. Of course, many other pundits and bloggers gave her the benefit of the doubt. Then her infamous, "white Americans" comment happened.

This after a long string of gaffes, innuendos and outright racist attacks that too many people in media decided to let pass and still give her the benefit of the doubt since many were coming from her own surrogates and even her husband.

Then Ketucky and West Virginia happened :

Are you telling me it is not in her mind that she has enough racists supporting her enough to go out and kill Obama for her?

Are you telling me this is not a shamelessly opportunistic moment of wishful thinking?

It is despicable and not only does it not have any place in this campaign. It has no place near the White House.

Hillary Clinton has demonstrated she is unfit to be President of the United States.

[ Editorial Note: Now we have the important part of the transcript. ]

This is one of those historic TV moments that people will be talking about for a long time. And let me tell you, I lost it as it was happening. Twitter or not, I was agog at the sight of David Gergen calling out Hillary and Bill Clinton on their racist strategy.

He even went as far as saying that there is a sense the culture is legitimizing the racist language and creating justifications that is allowing Clinton to base her electoral value on the racial composition of those of her voters who wouldnt not vote for Obama.

That's why it's particularly shocking to have seen David Gergen, a former communications advisor to Ronald Regan, say that racism is starting rear its head in ways we've never seen before; and to validate that for votes is counter to the ethos of the Democratic Party.

I mean, she's been talking about sexism in this race and she has complained about some in the last 24 hours.

You know race is really playing an increasing issue. And it also raises the question in my judgment of whether she shouldn't say, you know, if you want to vote against him because he's black, I don't want your vote. I don't want to win that way. This has no place in this primary.

She's raised the issue of sexism in this race and she's complained some about it the in the last 24 hours? Race is playing ... it's an increasing issue. That raises the question in my judgement, whether she shouldn't say, "You know, if you don't want to vote against him because he's black, then I don't want your vote."

And that's not even half of it. There is a powerful back and forth that is not included in this clip. Yet more importantly, CNN doesn't have neither a clip nor a transcript of this exchange (and the omitted one) on their site. There's the moments right before and after this exchange but no transcript for this important moment in US political history.

Goes to show how big media is at odds with it's own influence and power.

Watch this clip and see how David Gergen redeems the whole both republicans and the political analyst profession. To say this solidifies my admiration for him is to put it mildly : My admiration goes back to at least 20 years if not more of watching him do political commentary first on PBS and then on CNN.

WATCHI IT!

Hat Tip to Natalie (aka @natthedem) who twittered the video.

UPDATE!
Now with transcripts!