September 14, 2009 CNN - Campbell Brown

BROWN: This was the scene in Washington over the weekend, tens of thousands of activists venting their rage against President Obama, the man they have anointed public enemy number one. Yes, after a raucous summer, the tea party movement shows no sign of losing steam.

Last week alone, angry rallies across the country culminating in Saturday's pilgrimage you're watching there to the capital.

CNN's Jim Spellman has been tracking the movement. And here's just a little bit of what he has heard. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: An everyday tea-partier is an American citizen that's frustrated with the direction the country is going.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are truly concerned about the heartbeat of our country. They're taking our liberties away. It's tyranny. It's a gestapo-type tactic.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They're too much involvement in the government. We can take care of ourself.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I didn't vote for him. But I didn't necessarily have anything against what he was saying. He gets into office and it's like all the things that I was kind of afraid of really happened.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They can have my country when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I think their agenda is to slowly but surely take away everything that we have worked for and everything the Constitution stands for.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kill the bill! Kill the bill! Kill the bill!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Free the bill! Free the bill!

(SHOUTING)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All the czars that he picked are all either communists or socialists.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I really don't want to be a guinea pig for the experiment they have with the population control.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's going after our kids, and trying to indoctrinate them into a national defense army. And we're not going to let him do it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're kind of the ultimate check and balance, I suppose.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't want a revolution. I don't want a civil war. I would hate for that to happen, but it is a possibility. It's there as an option, as a last resort, should our government turn on its own people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Pretty strong stuff, but, hey, this is America. Politics not for the fainthearted. We are all about free speech.

Still, what does it say about our ability to engage in civil discourse? I want you to check out this protester. See the sign he's waving there? hat's the president made to look like an African witch doctor, pretty ugly racist image. That was a popular prop at Saturday's rally.

So, is this the work of a few fringe cranks here or does it tell us something truly troubling is brewing in this country? Can we debate issues anymore without devolving into sort of this vile smear attack?

Joining me now, Joe Wierzbicki, who is coordinator of the Tea Party Express, and also NPR John Ridley with us as well, and Daily Beast contributor John Avlon joining us with us also.

Continue reading »

David E’s Fablog: Race Riot, sponsored by corporate lobbyists

Glenn Greenwald: There's nothing new about right wing insanity...or stupidity

distributorcap NY: All American Children Left Behind

Scott Horton: Two Marine Generals take Cheney to the woodshed

$Blind In Texas$: I'm a Ninther

AMERICAblog News: One year after the fall of Lehman, few changes

The Henry Louis Gates situation is mainly a distraction, where the media has decided to document a sideshow instead of the hundreds of millions of people struggling every day with substandard health care coverage.

But there's also a serious policy component. Policemen should not be allowed to arrest someone for being an asshole in their own home. If that was the case, right-wing bloggers would all be doing 10-20. It appears clear, and I guess there may be audio tape to this effect, that the cop came to Gates' house, figured out that he was not a burglar, words were exchanged, and then the cop arrested him for disorderly conduct. That's really over the line of what cops should be allowed to do, regardless of the motivations, racial or otherwise.

The crime of disorderly conduct, beloved by cops who get into arguments with citizens, requires that the public be involved. Here's the relevant law from the Massachusetts Appeals Court, with citations and quotations omitted:

The statute authorizing prosecutions for disorderly conduct, G.L. c. 272, § 53, has been saved from constitutional infirmity by incorporating the definition of "disorderly" contained in § 250.2(1)(a) and (c) of the Model Penal Code. The resulting definition of "disorderly" includes only those individuals who, "with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof ... (a) engage in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; or ... (c) create a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.' "Public" is defined as affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access.

The lesson most cops understand (apart from the importance of using the word "tumultuous," which features prominently in Crowley's report) is that a person cannot violate 272/53 by yelling in his own home.

Read Crowley's report and stop on page two when he admits seeing Gates's Harvard photo ID. I don't care what Gates had said to him up until then, Crowley was obligated to leave. He had identified Gates. Any further investigation of Gates' right to be present in the house could have been done elsewhere. His decision to call HUPD seems disproportionate, but we could give him points for thoroughness if he had made that call from his car while keeping an eye on the house. Had a citizen refused to leave Gates' home after being told to, the cops could have made an arrest for trespass.

But for the sake of education, let's watch while Crowley makes it worse. Read on. He's staying put in Gates' home, having been asked to leave, and Gates is demanding his identification. What does Crowley do? He suggests that if Gates wants his name and badge number, he'll have to come outside to get it. What? Crowley may be forgiven for the initial approach and questioning, but surely he should understand that a citizen will be miffed at being questioned about his right to be in his own home. Perhaps Crowley could commit the following sentences to memory: "I'm sorry for disturbing you," and "I'm glad you're all right."

Spoiling for a fight, Crowley refuses to repeat his name and badge number. Most of us would hand over a business card or write the information on a scrap of paper. No, Crowley is upset and he's mad at Gates. He's been accused of racism. Nobody likes that, but if a cop can't take an insult without retaliating, he's in the wrong job. When a person is given a gun and a badge, we better make sure he's got a firm grasp on his temper. If Crowley had called Gates a name, I'd be disappointed in him, but Crowley did something much worse. He set Gates up for a criminal charge to punish Gates for his own embarrassment.

By telling Gates to come outside, Crowley establishes that he has lost all semblance of professionalism. It has now become personal and he wants to create a violation of 272/53. He gets Gates out onto the porch because a crowd has gathered providing onlookers who could experience alarm. Note his careful recitation (tumultuous behavior outside the residence in view of the public). And please do not overlook Crowley's final act of provocation. He tells an angry citizen to calm down while producing handcuffs. The only plausible question for the chief to ask about that little detail is: "Are you stupid, or do you think I'm stupid?" Crowley produced those handcuffs to provoke Gates and then arrested him. The decision to arrest is telling. If Crowley believed the charge was valid, he could have issued a summons. An arrest under these circumstances shows his true intent: to humiliate Gates.

The cop baited the guy into leaving the house so he could arrest him for making a cop feel bad.

I appreciate the work of law enforcement. But regardless of race, too many cops have the belief that if they get insulted, they have the right to turn that into an arresting offense. That's not the law whatsoever, nor should it be. It creates a chilling effect among the public not to call out bad behavior in law enforcement or raise your voice in any way. I know we're all supposed to believe that cops are saintly, but I live in LA. Police misconduct happens all the time, and we should be vigilant when it does.

Instead, the media takes the soccer ball and chases it into the corner, without any semblance of factual records or perspective. It becomes an emotional argument instead of a factual record of misconduct. We pay cops with tax money. We should not risk arrest when arguing with them.

OK, so this Maron v Seder ad is just a spoof, something along the lines of my earlier suggestions to John McCain that he simply give in to his party's inner Nativist and toss the Latino vote overboard. But it touches on something important.

Obama's candidacy has exposed one of the deep internal tensions that has always existed within the Republican Party's longtime use of the racial-fear card: One the one hand, the core of the GOP's appeals to suburban voters in particular has been predicated on preserving white privilege and blunting the advance of minority civil rights, particularly when it comes to changes in the demographic makeup of previously all-white communities. (That is, after all, the underlying nature of the Nativists' anti-Latino push.)

On the other hand, they can't appeal to those suburban voters with nakedly bigoted rhetoric -- it's been proven to be a turnoff for them. So they've been resorting to subtle dogwhistles throughout this campaign.

But in these final weeks, and as McCain stumbles into a deeper hole in the polls, the GOP is becoming increasingly frantic and desperate. And that's when the teeth are bared.

It will be important for Democrats and progressives not to become complacent at this point. For one thing, we really don't know whether or not appealing to the lizard-brain elements Outer Wingnuttia will work electorally speaking -- judging from the polls, it's more likely to drive McCain farther south. But we can't take that for granted.

More importantly, we need to be prepared for the consequences, both short- and long-term, of these kinds of appeals: Who it empowers, what demons it unleashes. As Democrats are the targets, it's important to be alert and attuned to the violent beast that's being unleashed.

Download | play    Download | play   (h/t Heather)

Barack Obama may be our first post-racial politics candidate, but it's clear the media has not caught up to that paradigm, especially any show that includes John McLaughlin and Pat Buchanan amongst its panel. Kudos to Media Matters, who caught it first: 

On the edition of the syndicated program The McLaughlin Group that aired the weekend of July 11-13, while discussing recent comments made by the Rev. Jesse Jackson about Sen. Barack Obama, host John McLaughlin said: "Question: Does it frost Jackson, Jesse Jackson, that someone like Obama, who fits the stereotype blacks once labeled as an Oreo -- a black on the outside, a white on the inside -- that an Oreo should be the beneficiary of the long civil rights struggle which Jesse Jackson spent his lifetime fighting for?" 

If I had been a guest on that panel, I think my jaw would have dropped right then.  Oreo?  Really, that's the best place to take this conversation?  To his credit, Peter Beinart does tell McLaughlin that it's an unfair depiction, but McLaughlin perseveres, thinking he's caught Beinart in a rhetorical trap when Beinart dismisses the notion that Obama should give as much weight to issues of discrimination in incarceration.

BEINART: But...Barack Obama doesn't talk about jobs and healthcare? He talks about it all the time. If he wanted to talk about the fact that there are too many people in prison, then you're asking him to do something that will lose him the election. That is politically...no serious political strategist...
MCLAUGHLIN: Oh...oh...oh...[crosstalk]
BEINART: He is a man trying to win the presidency, John.
MCLAUGHLIN: But then he's exactly what Jeremiah Wright says he is. He will do whatever is necessary to win.

So hold up here, McLaughlin.  That he doesn't talk about prison rates in the black community but encourages fathers (on Father's Day, mind you) to be present in their children's lives, he's doing whatever is necessary to win?  And then you had to give the floor to Pat Buchanan:

MCLAUGHLIN: Does Jackson have a legitimate point?
BUCHANAN: No, he doesn't. I'll tell you why, John. Here's why. What Barack Obama is saying is the message that needs to be heard. It's the Bill Cosby message. It is "Look, this is our responsibility. These are our families. White society is not responsible for our kids dropping out of schools or using drugs or going on welfare. We are." What Jesse Jackson says, is the white community's responsible and they've got to solve our problems.

Oh help me. Stereotype much, Pat? This is what passes as elevated public television political debate in this country.   The omnipresent Michelle Bernard tries to get this back on track and get the old guard to catch up on post-race politics: 

BERNARD: I want to go back to the point you made about whether or not Barack Obama is an Oreo, because if Barack Obama is an Oreo, then every member of this generation of African Americans is an Oreo, because we stand on the shoulders of the people who fought for our rights and all of us say that you cannot blame "The Man" or white racism for everything that ails the black community.

Pam's House Blend looks at that "nugget of truth"...

UPDATE: Media Matters is circulating a petition to ask John McLaughlin to apologize on air.

Transcripts below the fold:

Continue reading »

So says republican David Dreier on Late Edition, in his promotion of Social Security reform:

Video

Dreier: African Americans are...would be the greatest beneficiaries of this as they would be able with a shortened life span, they would be able to pass this on....

Rangel: So we die earlier we should invest....

It's nice to see how republicans are looking out for African American's shortened life span.