It was okay then, because we were right
Why are there so many calls for calm today by the same crowd that accepted or did very little to silence the horrible things said by Bush’s opponents? See this excellent piece by Victor David Hanson.
The auto bailouts – Which do you want first? The bad news or the bad news?
Chrysler reported losses of nearly $4 billion but the company “sees signs of improvement.” I can’t imagine anything that is not an improvement over a $4 billion dollar loss. It will all be okay though because GM will repay several billion dollars of federal government loans earlier than expected. Oops! Maybe not so okay. Turns out GM is repaying those government loans with TARP funds. According to Washington correspondent Jaimee Dupree, that is like, “using one credit card to pay off another.” No crystal ball as to when we can expect more good news from GM.
Disclosure, but only when politically expedient
In case you haven’t heard , the VAT, or value added tax, is now a hot topic. Supporters see the tax as either a way (as an add on to the current income tax) of solving the debt, or as a replacement to the income tax. What kills me is that in this same week that the SEC filed suit against Goldman Sachs based on failure to disclose information, there is actually a debate over whether or not it is acceptable for the tax to be invisible to We the People?!? We learn nothing.
By the way, have heard that nobody at the White House knew anything about the Goldman Sachs lawsuit before it hit the news? I don’t know what Rahm Emanuel’s definition of “Knew” is, but I would like to know.
Help wanted: Golfer’s ethics needed world-wide
An item that may only be related in my mind (Michael, are you out there?) to the above issue of disclosure only when expedient, and ethics; have you heard about golfer Brian Davis? He called a two stroke penalty on himself during a sudden death playoff Sunday, costing himself his first PGA win and more than $600,000 in winnings. He settled for second so still took home plenty of cash. He also established his name, his brand, as honest. We need more like him.
Gun rights groups scare away moderates
Do gun rights advocates really believe they will win supporters to their view of the Second Amendment by parading around in public with assault rifles? Scaring the hell out of the undecideds is more likely. Dear NRA, you forget that guns scare people – they’re designed that way. You won’t win supporters by scaring them; like it or not, that’s reality.
BTW, still no word on how the anti-gun extremists plan to get the guns away from the crooks. Wish I had a solution to the gun issue.
Census form overload
And finally… fill out your census forms already so we can quit seeing those ads. What a waste of money. This should require a few announcements through the press and that’s it. No commercials. Anybody that does not understand the importance of being counted doesn’t deserve to be counted.
{ 5 comments }
So what are you arguing? Is Racist rhetoric OK because hippies had Nuke Nixon signs? Do you want us to ignore it because you agree with them?
So what are you saying Lynn, that racist comments are worse than other hate speech? That anyone who fails to condemn racist comments is a racist ?
Did you ever think that if being a racist is so horrible that calling someone a racist is one of the nastiest things you could say about someone? Do you even know how one becomes a racist, how racial prejudice is transmitted through culture, community, family. Do you know what it takes to deprogram yourself of racist/prejudicial thought?
MYODB is an attempt to invoke thoughtful debate. Trying to slime people with the racist tag is the epitome of non-thoughtfulness. Until I am banned from this site I will call you out any time you do try it.
I think it’s telling that you actually capitalized the word. I suggest you go learn something about it before you spew off again.
You’ve misunderstood me, but I’ll concede I didn’t make myself clear. My question is whether it’s Ok to excuse the racist remarks because of agreement with the other parts of the message, not the remarks themselves. We need to tell the truth to our friends. But, yes, I think overt racism can be thought of as worse than other kinds of polarizing speech because it’s oppressive to people who aren’t in the debate. You could say that portraying Obma as Hitler is demeaning to the people who suffered under the Nazis, but racist remarks against Obama in effect say, “I hate Obama, and I don’t think any black person should be president.” Again, I’m not saying that’s a position of the Tea Party, but they shouldn’t tolerate that message, even from the fringe element of their party (no matter how mad they are). If they want to portray all Liberals as “bed-wetters” or some other taunt, at least they’re still targeting the people in the debate–although it’s not helpful, it’s not as bad as racist speech, or other speech that brings in groups for something other than positions or ideology.
Personally I think our society is too worked up over the word racism. It rarely means what people think it does. The speaker chooses to use the word racist based on the second definition while the listener tends to think of the first definition. So someone says the N word and they are described as a racist and then the audience believes they have been discussing a white supremacist bent on the destruction of other races.
I agree with your point regarding who is in the debate but when you call the tea party racist you’ve added those people to the debate. In fact you’ve made them the debate. Or, more accurately, you have made the protection of them the debate.
It’s unfortunate that all it takes for you to turn away from the tea party message is the unfortunate fact that some people who show up to their events hold (and express) some viewpoints that you find so disagreeable.
The tea party is a group of people who gathered together to promote a single message about the power of government. But now they are being forced to spend their time fighting off charges of racism and their message is being lost in this argument over whether the real message is a racist one.
That is the unfortunate consequence of a society scared to death of the word racist.
I have a different perspective. It seems to me that there are such negative consequences for “playing the race card” these days, that we’re in danger of silencing discussions of racism in society. As for the Tea Party, if they eventually settle on a small government message, stop with the “regular people” rhetoric, quit sneering at the president, end the veiled threats about violent overthrow of the government, and stay away from the right on civil rights, I’ll give them a chance. I don’t see any of those things happening.