When All Motives Are Base, All Thoughts Are Wrong
By Mitch Berg
Angie Harmon, the model and former Law and Order star and “out” Republican in Hollywood, said something the other day that started me thinking.
She was decrying the impulse among Obama’s supporters in Hollywood to brand criticizing the President as “racist”. Of course we’ve seen this before; during the campaign, countless Democrat activists tried to position “not voting for Obama” as “racism”.
But he won!
But the dynamic continues:
Here’s my problem with this, I’m just going to come out and say it. If I have anything to say against Obama it’s not because I’m a racist, it’s because I don’t like what he’s doing as President and anybody should be able to feel that way, but what I find now is that if you say anything against him you’re called a racist,” Harmon told Tarts at Thursday’s Los Angeles launch of the new eyelash-growing formula, Latisse. “But it has nothing to do with it, I don’t care what color he is. I’m just not crazy about what he’s doing and I heard all about this, and he’s gonna do that and change and change, so okay … I’m still dressing for a recession over here buddy and we’ve got unemployment at an all-time high and that was his number one thing and that’s the thing I really don’t appreciate. If I’m going to disagree with my President, that doesn’t make me a racist. If I was to disagree with W, that doesn’t make me racist. It has nothing to do with it, it is ridiculous.”
These are many of the same people who whinged that their “patriotism” was being impugned over the past years (although none of them can ever show an example of this when asked. Never).
Harmon’s remarks brought to mind an appearance I had with Rep. Phyllis Kahn of Minneapolis on Marty Owings’ “Radio Free Nation” a few weeks ago. The topic was gay marriage.
Now, gay marriage isn’t exactly my hottest-button issue; if we don’t win the War on Terror and save the economy from the ravages of a decade of government/market cronyism and the canoodling of a neo-socialist administration, then gay marriage will be the least of the stresses facing the traditional family.
But I asked Kahn, a gay-marriage supporter: “What do you make of the fact that voters have categorically rejected gay marriage, even in liberal bastions like Oregon and California?”
Her response: “There’s a survey that shows 60% of voters today would vote against the Bill of Rights!”.
I ignored the irony that this was a woman who’s spent a career going above and beyond the DFL’s drive to flense the Second, Fifth and Tenth Amendments, and who’s spent 36 years in the Legislature serving as a front-woman for an educational-industrial complex that’s dumbed down Minnesota students to the point where I’d be surprised if a tiny minority could recite the Bill of Rights in the first place. But I did point out that even if I accepted the accuracy of that “survey” (or its existence – and I accept neither, but I digress), it’s a non-sequitur; specific states in all their diverse glory did vote, repeatedly on on the record, in states conservative, liberal and whackdoodlesque, to reject the idea.
And yet she repeated that exact refrain several more times during the appearance. “You can reason with Lufthansa; you can also reason with livestock, for all the good it’ll do you”, PJ O’Rourke once wrote. I thought of that as I listened to Kahn repeat the meme over and over – and then shook it off. This was not bovinity.
It was part of the Dems’ attempt to control the language.
If you dissent from The One, you’re a racist. There’s no nuance asked or granted; your motives are no different from a Klansman’s.
Have a principled objection to the notion of Gay Marriage? Your nuances – wanting to separate religion from contract law, your actual beliefs – are of no interest. You are no different than people who want to beat protesters or burn heretics at the stake.
And of course, this follows nearly a decade of “them” accusing “us” of…well, you know.
Dissent isn’t patriotic. It’s a sign of moral turpitude.
Oh, yeah – and don’t you dare call them unpatriotic!
March 31st, 2009 at 9:15 am
I’m still kinda mad that Angie didn’t call me when she was in town last summer for the RNC. My wife even said that I could have her over if she called.
March 31st, 2009 at 9:22 am
A. Who said criticizing Obama is racist? This CA GOP flyer is racist.
http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/00836AD6-D0C3-4902-A0B1-9C5EB27BA55A/
But criticizing Obama per se is not racist. Sending him a photoshop picture of the White House in a watermelon garden, racist. Criticism, not.
B. Who says we don’t want you to attack the most popular politician in America? Please, do all you can to differentiate yourselves from him.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:14 am
When roadside bombings started to take their toll, Feckless Jeff gleefully reported that our troops were being mowed down like grass. That was unpatriotic and I told him so.
When Charley Underwood wrote in a comment in Flash’s little corner of the Sorosphere that our troops were 21st century Nazi Sturmtroopen, that was unpatriotic and I told him so.
As you know, I was against going into Iraq from the start. But I would never have joined any of the “peace” marches that slithered the streets of St. Paul, because they were are not really anti-war as much as they are pro-terrorist/anti-American.
The fact is that there is a large segment of the left that hates America
There is certianly an element of racism at work where Obama is concerned, but you’ll find more of it in the deep blue, Democrat backwoods of the Iron Range than you will at the BPOU in Edina.
The Democrat party embrases the lowest common denominators across all demographics, their racists are just happen to have a higher profile right now.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:41 am
This was not bovinity.
Yes it is Mitch. We’ve seen how much the lefties need to keep herd on themselves, between JournoList and the other echo chambers. Now they’re trying to export that: the liberals wants to herd you to the correct position.
Any objections will be met with cattle prods at the beginning and escalate from there.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:43 am
“…in Flash’s little corner of the Sorosphere…”
Bingo!!!
“But criticizing Obama per se is not racist.”
per se? Sure, the Liberal Fascists just have to add that qualifier in order to keep the race card going.
How about this, DumbFL_Dick:
Criticizing Obama is not racist.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:45 am
“a large segment of the left that hates America”
We love America. That is why we hate the people who tried to destroy her for the last eight years. You took a Goddess and left her broke, humiliated, and dishonored.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:50 am
K-Rod:
Elementary logic is not a secret plot against the GOP, although it does often seem to be your worst enemy.
“Criticizing Obama is not racist”. That would depend on how you do it, obviously. Even your tiny little brain must be able to think up a few examples.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:55 am
Who said criticizing Obama is racist?
Jack Cafferty does.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:58 am
How was America left broken? And what in the Obama plan so far will heal it?
March 31st, 2009 at 11:03 am
Rick, you are of course right in this, you both essentially said the same thing, on it’s face criticizing Obama is not racist. It’s the motive for the criticism. What Ms. Harmon is tired of, quite rightly, is the imposition of a preconception upon her for such criticism. I think any reasoning person can accept that quibble.
Let me say this too: If dissent was patriotic in October, it still is in March.
March 31st, 2009 at 11:11 am
Hey Rick, I hear about Democrats everyday who are anti-Christian bigots. So does that make all Democrats Christian-bashing bigots?
March 31st, 2009 at 11:33 am
The only people who’ve said dissent isn’t patriotic that I can recall are those who said “If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists” – that would be one George W. Bush – and his toadies in the neo-con arena.
However, hoping the nation fails, hoping it’s most recently elected President fails in time of dire crisis, that’s certainly NOT patriotic, no more and no less patriotic than hoping the US military effort in Iraq would fail. Those who hope for the former are simply petulant babies, those who hoped for the latter were/are unpatriotic, no argument. However of course, that wasn’t really the point was it? It was to deflect this discussion off into nonsense about racism, and faux indignation about anti-american accusations when the issue wasn’t dissent, wasn’t whether or not ANY criticism of Obama is racist, but rather that the NEO-CON general form is a. often born of latent racist appeal (i.e. watermellon cartoons) and b. Shot (in the Dark) Through with rabidly unpatriotic fervor hoping for failure over political defeat.
March 31st, 2009 at 11:39 am
Mitch:
“Jack Cafferty does.” No he does not. Read your link. Saying some people are not voting for Obama for racist reasons is nothing like saying everyone who criticizes Obama is a racist.
Chuck:
“So does that make all Democrats Christian-bashing bigots”
No.
Bill: “What Ms. Harmon is tired of, quite rightly, is the imposition of a preconception upon her for such criticism.” Who is imposing such a preconception on her? I would be a lot more concerned with Ms. Harmon’s delicate mental state, if she could actual produce an example.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:02 pm
peev wrote:
“If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists”
Peev, every so often you drag out this canard & I have to shoot it down _again_.
Here is the Bush quote in context:
March 31st, 2009 at 12:05 pm
RickDFL-
B. Who says we don’t want you to attack the most popular politician in America? Please, do all you can to differentiate yourselves from him.
In March 2003, at the time of the Iraq invasion, Bush’s approval rating was ten points higher than Obama’s is now.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:19 pm
“Jack Cafferty does.” No he does not. Read your link. Saying some people are not voting for Obama for racist reasons is nothing like saying everyone who criticizes Obama is a racist.
That’s a, ahem, charitable reading of his statement.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:20 pm
“…a few examples.
Step up to the plate boy, give us a few examples of racist criticizm of Obama by posters and commentors on Shot in the Dark blog.
Come on, DumbFL_Dick. Let’s see some quotes.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:25 pm
the most popular politician in America?
He’s been in office two months and change. His positives outpoll his negatives by single digits and falling. And he’s already showing the strain.
The Presidency is a Marathon. We’ve done the first 1600 meters.
Please, do all you can to differentiate yourselves from him.
Oh, may we? By your leave?
Well, then, with your kind permission that is what I shall do – until Nancy Pelosi gets it banned, anyway.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Angry Clown has insisted that calling Obama ‘Obammy’ is Racist Secret Code.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:43 pm
When everything is racist, nothing is racist.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Ah, some TV bim says it’s true. So it must be.
The Jack Cafferty link is the best you can do to stiffen the spine of that straw man? Please.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:15 pm
RickDFL said:
“Elementary logic is not a secret plot against the GOP”
Indeed, it’s always seemed more of a plot against RickDFL. Hehe.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:16 pm
angryclown said:
“The Jack Cafferty link is the best you can do to stiffen the spine of that straw man? Please.”
Actually, I think he has many, many user comments he could use in their place. Many of them authored by you, angryclown.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:17 pm
The Jack Cafferty link is the best you can do to stiffen the spine of that straw man? Please
There’s more, but that’s really not the point. Kahn is part of a big, ugly tendency to equate dissent with ugliness of one kind or another.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Peev needs to point out who has wish or prayed for the nation to fail?
Let’s here it, Pernicious.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:24 pm
“Indeed, it’s always seemed more of a plot against RickDFL. Hehe.”
Kahn believes that being in the majority and against gay marriage is similar to being in the majority and not supporting the Bill of Rights.
Obama is against gay marriage.
Therefore Obama is against the Bill of Rights.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Supporting your assertions with facts actually is the point. More to the point, I’m saying that your point is pointless.
By the way, what does Uma Thurman think about all this? She’s hot, so she must know what she’s talking about.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Thurman’s background is totally upper-middle-class counter-culture, AC. That’s makes her ignorant about how the real world works. There is no wisdom in such people.
How wealthy counter-culture?
Her mother was once married to Timothy Leary. In a ceremony presided over by Salvador Dali.
March 31st, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Apparently, if you are a racist, you voted 55% to 44% for Obama.
http://thenextright.com/jon-henke/race-and-the-2008-election-what-the-exit-polls-showed
March 31st, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Uma hasn’t been hot for years… she’s been weird looking for quite some time now.
With this, among other comments, we judge AC.
March 31st, 2009 at 2:16 pm
I’m sorry, everything after “Angie Harmon” is a little fuzzy…
March 31st, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Mitch:
“hat’s a, ahem, charitable reading of his statement”. If by ‘charitable’ you mean ‘almost verbatim’.
“Oh, may we? By your leave?” Yes with encouragement.
“There’s more, but that’s really not the point.” Evidence is always beside the point at SITD.
“Kahn is part of a big, ugly tendency to equate dissent with ugliness of one kind or another.” Huh? Kahn made a fairly elementary point: Constitutional rights are not subject to popular referendum. If you think there is a Constitutional right to x, it does not matter if voters don’t like x. Thus, if the residents of Mpls. voted to ban all private firearms, it wouldn’t matter b/c it would violate the 2nd Amendement. How does that equate “dissent with ugliness”?
K-Rod:
“give us a few examples of racist criticizm of Obama by posters and commentors on Shot in the Dark blog” Why? Are you guys racists?
Terry:
“Angry Clown has insisted that calling Obama ‘Obammy’ is Racist Secret Code.” Maybe? Why do you/they call him that?
March 31st, 2009 at 2:58 pm
“There’s more, but that’s really not the point.” Evidence is always beside the point at SITD.
I remember that you had this insane idea that Missouri was part of the Confederacy. You simply would not admit that you were wrong. Finally I quoted the list of Confederate states from the Britannica — Missouri was not among them — and you stopped braying your ignorance on the subject.
But you never admitted that you were wrong.
At one point in the discussion you said that people with ideas like mine were like the Confederates, this, apparently because I had insisted on acknowledging a historical truth. That bit if slander — the cry of ‘treason!’ seems to be your common resort when you find that you’ve painted yourself into a rhetorical corner.
So your remarks about evidence being beside the point at SITD should be taken in that light, unless you are refering to peev’s insane ramblings, or, of course, your own comments.
March 31st, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Terry:
“Angry Clown has insisted that calling Obama ‘Obammy’ is Racist Secret Code.” Maybe? Why do you/they call him that?
Welcome Commisar RickDFL, Torquemada-in-Chief of the Court of Thought Crimes.
March 31st, 2009 at 3:15 pm
“Maybe?” Racist Secret Code. “Maybe?” WTF do you mean by “Maybe”?
Is that all you got, DumbFL_Dick? Do you need to check DU or DKos before you answer with more than “Maybe”?
You are a tool, a Useful Idiot for the Liberal Fascists.
March 31st, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Terry:
Our disagreement about MO was not factual, we both agree about the facts. You simply define every state as entirely in or entirely out of the Confederacy. Like most historians, I define a group of states (the border states) that fell somewhere in between, geographically, politically, legally, and militarily.
As for treason, I don’t think had anything to do with your factual views about Missouri.
“Welcome Commisar RickDFL, Torquemada-in-Chief of the Court of Thought Crimes.” Oh come on you big baby. Man up. You brought the issue up. You gonna run and hide when somebody tries to address it.
K-Rod:
“Do you need to check DU or DKos before you answer with more than “Maybe”” No. I need to know why people use the name. I don’t get why the people who use it think it to be funny or insulting. Without knowing that, I can’t say whether those reasons are racist. I suppose trying to determine relevant facts, before forming an opinion may be a strange procedure to you.
March 31st, 2009 at 4:06 pm
You still insist that Missouri was part of the Confederacy? Lol.
It’s not a disagreement between you & me, RickDFL, it’s a disagreement between you and reality. If you can’t accept the Britannica’s list of confederate states, well, you might as well say that the American colonies before the 1776 were part of Spain, because Spain had once claimed all of North America.
You are a stranger to truth, RickDFL.
March 31st, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Come on and man up, dicky boy. With out a reason to scream racism just STFU. You could just as easily say people use the name not out of racism but out of respect for the man.
Or, in your case DumbFL_Dick, out of blind adoration from a Useful Idiot like you.
Stop being a tool. Man up and stop acting like a coward.
Skepticism instead of mysticism. Try it.
March 31st, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Ahem, RatioRick, as usual, your “expertise” in all things is unquestionable! How is that incontrovertible AGW thing working out for you? Sweating yet?
March 31st, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Changed to MMGW:
Mcdonalds Made Global Warming
Sweating yet?
😆
March 31st, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Terry:
You can define the term “part of the Confederacy” however you want, it is not a factual question. There is no disagreement between you, me, or reality.
March 31st, 2009 at 4:37 pm
K-Rod:
“You could just as easily say people use the name not out of racism but out of respect for the man”
Quick show of hands SITD users. How many call Obama ‘Obammy’ out of respect for the man?
March 31st, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Why would you even mention racism, DickyDFL? Why?
Projection?
March 31st, 2009 at 5:08 pm
The whole RickDFL thinks Missouri was part of the confederacy thread is here:
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=4267
You will also learn some other things that only RickDFL believes, like the Federal government was not a creation of the States.
Here’s RickDFL accusing me of treason:
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=4267#comment-46184
Commissar RickDFL thinks that people who believe that the Federal Government was created by the states can be ‘justly butchered’. Sounds un-American to me.
March 31st, 2009 at 5:35 pm
RickDFL, your comment re Missouri was made in the context of my statement:
Most of the states that were once part of the confederacy were never ‘federal territories”. They could not ‘revert’ to a status they never had.
You responded:
Well Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Missouri were all Federal Territories prior to their statehood. That is a majority.
It is a simple matter of history that neither Missouri nor Kentucky were Confederate States.
There is a link to the whole exchange waiting in Mitch’s moderation queue.
March 31st, 2009 at 5:52 pm
“Kahn made a fairly elementary point: Constitutional rights are not subject to referendum.” You`re correct- and there`s no right to marrige in the Constitution. Which is why Kahn`s answer was so evasive.
March 31st, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Terry, Terry, Terry. Your are confusing RatioRick with somebody who knows how to spell “fact”, or knows the definition.
March 31st, 2009 at 7:58 pm
RatioRick: I think the better show of hands would be to a question – who has respect for 0bamby to begin with? 0bamination has done nothing, zip, zilch, nada, nothing to earn the respect you propose he deserves. Yes, he won, buoyed by the media and mindless minions such as yourself, but that is all.
And there is nothing racist in my comment – I resent the man, what he stands for, and what he is doing to this great country. His skin color is immaterial.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Quick show of hands SITD users. How many call Obama ‘Obammy’ out of respect for the man?
I call him Mr. Obama. Sometimes “Great Leader” when I’m trying to emulate asshat liberals. I have so much more class than your average clown. Or a DFL hack, for that matter.
April 1st, 2009 at 8:22 am
RickDFL said:
“Quick show of hands”
Is this the same RickDFL who usually wants a peer reviewed article referenced in order to have a conversation almost any topic? Has RickDFL’s account been hacked? Or, more likely, are his standards are as slippery as his logic, his command of the facts, and his understanding of the world?