Tuesday, October 21, 2008

The Ever-Present Danger of Prejudice & Hate

If anyone is naive enough to believe we have overcome the deeply embedded racism, ignorance, and anti-intellectualism of our collective past, that person needs to search out on YouTude a recent broadcast of the Chris Matthews show called "Hardball."

Personally, I hate this show, and consider the host to be a pompous ass, the worst kind of screamer and poser who so pollutes our political landscape that I fear for our collective future if the likes of him prevail.

That said, even a scumball like him is better than the hate-mongerers running for office this year. Which is why I missed his only useful contribution to the current election cycle the other day when he interviewed the incumbent Republican Rep. Michelle Bachmann (MN). In her appearance, she played one of the ugliest cards in American political memory.

According to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, one of many formerly great American newspapers now technically in bankruptcy: "Matthews on Friday asked Bachmann whether she believed that Obama may have anti-American views. Bachmann replied: "Absolutely, I'm very concerned that he may have anti-American views."

She went on to call for a broad investigation into how many other members of Congress hold what she considers "anti-American" views.

For the good of our country and our collective future, let's hope this idiot political hack loses her bid for re-election.

Like Sarah Palin, she represents the worst our people have to offer one another. No doubt, she is utterly unaware of the McCarthy Era, the darkest period for creative people, loyal, deeply intelligent people since the J. Edgar Hoover purges of 1919.

Does history have to repeat itself. Is anybody paying attention.

I cannot contribute to political campaigns because I am a journalist in the old-fashioned sense. I've never given a dollar to anybody. But if I could, I would send lots of money to the guy running against Michelle Bachmann, because she is a true "enemy of the people" like you and me, assuming that you also believe in truth not ignorance, tolerance not hatred, intelligence not prejudice.

On the other hand, when you look deeply into your own heart, you may still believe in the ugliness, and if so, go ahead and vote Republican next month. If you honestly believe some of us are more loyal than others, vote Republican. If you feel the knowing execution of an innocent woman in the '50s was justified, go ahead and vote Republican. If you believe the "blacklisting" of so many artists was justified in the McCarthy era, go ahead and vote Republican.

Perhaps, when all is said and done, your cohort may still prevail. I doubt it, but if it does, my voice will go silent. I will refuse to express myself in a nation of hate, preducice and ignorance, so if the GOP wins on November 4th, this blog will go silent, permanently.

-30-

p.s. Bachmann is currently backtracking at 100 mph, saying she was "trapped" by Matthews. Right. Blame the messenger, all the way back to Plato's Cave. If you cannot stand up for what you said, Congresswoman, and what it means, more fool you. Pretend an evil media person tricked you, just like Palin claims all the time. Sorry, that dog just don't hunt no more. Either stand up for what you believe, and accept the heat, or get out of the way of those of us desperately trying to save this blessed society of ours!

4 comments:

DanogramUSA said...

OK. I watched a 6 minute version of Chris Mathews' interview of Michelle Bachmann... And I identified with her stated concerns about “anti-American” views. Bear with me here, I will explain.

To begin, I would establish one seemingly unconnected truth: The weather changes, as does virtually everything else in our physical world – but the nature of man in recorded history does not. We look back to the earliest records and sometimes find awesomely inspired insight regarding the human drama from our most distant ancestors. One marvels at the sameness of human thought and conduct from then to now.

Civilizations have come and gone. All manner of social structure have been attempted on large and small scales. In terms of providing hope, happiness, and prosperity to the greatest number of its citizenry, it could be argued that most have failed. I know of none which can rival the relatively short history of our great nation. No one need starve, go naked, or be without shelter or emergency medical help except by his or her own choosing. Our bounty as a nation has been enormous compared to any other past or present. And, for all the perceived “unfairness” or “inequalities” one might point to, this country remains, unequivocally, the best provider of opportunity to enjoy a full life with hope for a better tomorrow.

What strengths and virtues we have exhibited as a people are directly attributed to our founding law, our Constitution. Many of the brightest and most admired people of the world's most recent two centuries have spoken and written of this often.

For those among us who see only the evil; who believe some radical change is urgently needed (indeed even possible); who believe human beings can be compelled to perfection; who look to circumvent, undermine, or destroy our nation's underpinnings to compel such change, this world must seem bleak indeed.

To appreciate how far we have come in a scant two and one half centuries one need only trace our evolving conduct in the most basic and significant of societal behaviors. We cast off the evils of slavery and indentured servitude (tens of thousands of white Europeans came to the continent and lived out their lives in conditions documented to be quite as horrendous as outright slavery), struggling since to tame the evils of residual bigotries of every kind. We have made much progress, and continue to progress.

Where we might dream of the day when all misconduct is erased, where tolerance is universal, where quality of outcome is absolutely assured for all, we pause to reflect on the realities that are. No such utopias will be realized soon. If we are ever to achieve greater levels of good as a people, we must continue to struggle with those realities; we must recognize the tremendous growth we have thus far achieved and understand that it came at high price and long struggle. Continued growth means much more work and much more time to accomplish. There are no shortcuts.

Greed, avarice, fear, hate, violence, immorality – such things have always been the burden of our social makeup, as have they always throughout human history's many other societies. But we are a nation largely of determined and good people. People determined to do ever better. Most of us understand that our progress can only happen within the rule of law and can only be accelerated by free will, can only be slowed or stopped by the introduction of tyranny.

Forgive me here if it appears I'm treading on wounds, but to fully explain my opening statement I must use Ayers, Rezko, and Wright specifically to illustrate. I consider all three to be among those who can be loosely referred to as “anti-American”. William Ayers and Reverend Wright have expounded hateful views of America, not just recently and not infrequently, but often, consistently, and for several decades. They have condemned our nation for the failure of, in reality, a relative few evil doers. While all of us easily find real fault in America's past and present, and righteously seek correction for the wrongs we perceive today, their spoken and written words teach hate for what America represents.

Tony Rezko has shown utter contempt for other Americans; his actions have damaged many for personal gain, in defiance of law and moral responsibility.

It would be a stretch to raise questions of Barak Obama's judgment if one accepts that his interactions with these three individuals was merely brief and inconsequential. But we know that is not true, and we know this by record and by his own statements. The stretch becomes, for instance, the belief that he never heard Reverend Wright's radical and hateful preachings in 20 years of attending (by his own estimate) an average of two sermons a month (roughly 480 sermons).

There are many of us with misgivings about Obama's personal judgment because we have yet to hear from him a more complete and, frankly, believable explanation of his relationship to these and other questionable personalities.

“Anti-American” does apply to any number of Rezkos, Wrights, and Ayers in my view.

David Weir said...

Of course, the same "guilt by association" argument could be applied to McCain, Palin, Biden, and every politician, since they associate with thousands and thousands of people. To pick out a few bad apples is cheap stuff. We already know all there is to know about Ayres' association with Obama; in fact thanks to the gOp we know more than actually exists or existed! This is just all disguised and rationalized justification for holding Obama to a different standard than the others, which to me, equals old-time smear tactics. It would be simple to do this to McCain, given his shady associations, with a far more serious level of credibility. Fortunately, Obama refuses to sink to gutter level politcs. He talks about issues, problems and policies that affect us all. Only losers play the game McCain-Palin are playing.

DanogramUSA said...

You're right. All of us can point to interactions with persons of dubious character. As you know, my working life was centered on “fighting crime and/or evil” (OK, a humorous description, but you know what I mean). Yet, there were many people of VERY dubious character who crossed my path from time to time. If you ignored all other associations in my life, you might destroy my reputation thoroughly.

However, what we are discussing in Obama's case is a question of balance. Discount politicians' statements for or against Obama (their motives are, as always, suspect), and you must look very hard for credible positive testimony for him. Outside of his immediate family, where are the credible personal testimonials from long time friends of positive repute to balance his associations with bitter and/or criminal personalities? That's a serious question, by the way, I'd really be interested to review them.

As you know, I've long questioned Barak's substance. With the real possibility of of his ascendancy to our highest office, I'm very concerned that he has the personal values to assure he will serve to the country's benefit. As I've noted before, if he does not possess strong personal pro-American values the scary white guys (Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Tony Rezko, William Ayers, to name a few) will cause much damaging influence.

David Weir said...

I'd start with Warren Buffett, Colin Powell, Robert Rubin, his Grandma and his Wife, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Caroline Kennedy, and the people running his campaign. Name an "anti-American" in that group? These are among the core patriots of our time. None of the names you listed have any influence whatsoever on Obama. None hav been asked to help him develop policy or strategy. They are incidental people, of zero interest to Obama's administration. It's time to drop the opposition and support the best chance we have for a great leader, one deserving of all loyal Americans' support.