The Bush administration has embraced a term that truly sets my teeth on edge: The Blame Game.
Yet again, the administration trivializes that which it wants to draw attention from or diminish, finding new and innovative ways to dodge questions and avoid responsibility.
I have no clear idea yet, for certain, if lapses in administrative judgment can be blamed for everything from siphoning money away from shoring up the levies in order to support the war and Bush’s tax cuts, to slow response to the emergency. But these are questions that must be asked. Clearly, the Bush administration embraces this notion with the same enthusiasm and thirst for truth that it did the 9/11 panel. Instead it endeavors to sprint along the obvious “high road”: The Bush administration will not play “the blame game” when people need to be helped.
You know what? The government is large enough to multitask. There’s no reason it can’t help people AND investigate. Not play “the blame game.” It’s not a game, Mr. Bush. Perhaps much of your life has been thus far. Play with toys such as corporations, governments and armies, run them into the ground, and then wait for others to clean up your mess. But it’s not. A game. It never has been, and that’s something that this administration has yet to comprehend.
One thing guaranteed, though: They’ll try to find a way to blame it on Clinton. But Clinton shouldn’t take it personally. It’s all part of the game.
UPDATED 10:45 AM. Maggie Thompson sent me the following link: http://www.thisisnotover.com/archives/2005/09/heres_what_gets.html This is one of those “I wish I’d said that” entries.
PAD
• 
Keeping qualified drivers until the last moment should be part of the plan, shouldn’t it?
And how do you propose to do that? Imprison the bus drivers when a storm approaches, until you’re sure you don’t need them anymore?
Set up a ‘watch list’ and have everyone leaving the city go through checkpoints & identify themselves so that bus drivers can’t leave the city?
And how do you propose to do that?
It’s called planning. Using people who are doing other things who are cross trained to do something else. Last ones out, who aren’t as important as police, to be the drivers.
“If the city had a plan to use the buses but none to provide drivers or gas to them…what good was it?”
Not very much, as we’re seeing. And while this aspect of the emergency plan wasn’t very effective, focusing on it overlooks those aspects of the plan that allowed the greater mojority, over 90%, of those in harms way to evacuate.
How’s the old military plan saying go? Something like every plan is perfect until the fighting starts? At all levels, this storm has proven that, again and again. This isn’t the first time a monster storm has struck this country. It won’t be the last. And while lessons learned in other areas were obviously not incorporated in New Orleans’ evacuation plan, the evacuation was not a total failure. It was nearly a total success, with less than 4% of the population remaining.
Out of curiosity, I’ve contacted a used school bus vendor, asking what the range of a typical school bus is. If I get a response, I’ll pass that along here.
According to thisL http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:E-yOmvAp3G0J:www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article%3FAID%3D/20050825/NEWS01/508250342/1006/NEWS+school+bus+%22mpg%22&hl=en
“The average school bus — make that gas hog — weighs about 28,000 pounds, carries a 60-gallon gas tank, hauls about 70 students and gets only about 6 or 7 miles per gallon.”
60 times(best case scenario) 7 mpg = 420 miles.
I would imagine that city buses would be about the same and if anything, would get fewer MPG. Heavy duty armored national guard vehicles even less.
If the city had a plan to use the buses but none to provide drivers or gas to them…what good was it?
They did use buses! They used city buses! In particular, city buses were used to shuttle people(reg required) to the Superdome. Of course it would have been better to shuttle them out of town, but where? Chances are, a lot of these people had nowhere to go.
“Right-wing people play it by accusing left-wing of shouting “RACISM!” and left-wingers play it by accusing right-wingers of racism. It’s complete and utter bûllšhìŧ on both sides, and played equally by both sides. You’re doing it right now.”
OK.
Sooooo… You admit the left wingers use the race card. You then point out that pointing out the use of the race card is itself using the race card and thus we who point it out are as bad as the ones using it.
I’m not drunk enough to get that logic.
I like this comment from suspect-device:
Yeah, geez. Why would leaders want to use the buses to get people the hëll outta dodge? For that matter, why the hëll are these people complaining about not having water for four days? At least one account I read had a helicopter dropping a load of water at the Convention Center. I mean, geez, they dropped it from forty feet up and all the bottles exploded, but, hey, we tried. And that’s all that matters, right? RIGHT?
Jerry, thanks, I was trying to figure out that one myself.
I mean, I know that there are LOTS of racist right wingers but among other conservatives they are usually treated as embarassments. Al Sharpton gets a free ride, treated as someone worthy of being on stage with the presumed nominee for president. Anyone who lived near Glenns falls when this criminal was doing the Tawana Bawley fiasco…the sight of him makes me want to turn away.
I don’t blame all liberals just because some nut blogs in the Huffington Post that blacks are eating each other after 4 days in New Orleans. I do blame them if this kook is ever again treated as a serious man by liberals. I mean, it didn’t take too many stupid statement by Pat Robertson for me to figure out that he isn’t worth a bucket of warm spit. How many dumb things will it take for the moonbats to do the same with their crazy aunts in the closet?
A question re: buses:
What if they had used the buses to remove the people, but then couldn’t get them all out of the city because of all of the roads blocked by police who wouldn’t let the NO people into their cities? Then what? Leave the busses on the highways or go to the superdome which is what was done?
The point I’m trying to make is that Bill is accusing liberals of using the race card to foment racial hatred and that it’s a liberal specific issue. I say, “Bûllšhìŧ.” It is used equally on both sides. Now, in my further attempt for clarification, I hadn’t had my coffee yet.
>What if they had used the buses to remove the people, but then couldn’t get them all out of the city because of all of the roads blocked by police who wouldn’t let the NO people into their cities? Then what? Leave the busses on the highways or go to the superdome which is what was done?
Well, just a thought here, but the buses were LEAVING, police were trying to stop vehicles from ENTERING. Wouldn’t they just get out of the way and let the buses through?
Clarifying my thoughts: I think the race card is used by liberals, I think the race card is used by conservatives. I think both groups use it irresponsibly and recklessly, for the sole reason of appealing to their base. I think liberals use it to show just how little conservatives (in this case meaning the current administration) care for minorities, and I think that conservatives use it to prove “Oh yes we do.”
However, I also think that conservatives try to downplay issues that can and are race-related, simply by denying they exist. Do I think that the end results of Katrina are race related? Absolutely. Is that a conscious choice on the part of anyone involved? I seriously doubt it. But when the poorest areas of a city are the hardest hit by a Cat5 hurricane, and those areas are overwhelmingly populated with minorities, AND those areas are the last to receive aid, it would seem that the “race card” (which, as a term, is every bit as fûçkìņg annoying and trite as “blame game” – thank you, Johnny Cochrane) is perhaps not inappropriate to those who live at the mercy of relief efforts. Poverty may be colorblind, but it seems to be fairly heavily biased towards specific groups.
In the words of Kanye West:
West: I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, “They’re looting.” You see a white family, it says, “They’re looking for food.” And, you know, it’s been five days [waiting for federal help] because most of the people are black. And even for me to complain about it, I would be a hypocrite because I’ve tried to turn away from the TV because it’s too hard to watch. I’ve even been shopping before even giving a donation, so now I’m calling my business manager right now to see what is the biggest amount I can give, and just to imagine if I was down there, and those are my people down there. So anybody out there that wants to do anything that we can help — with the way America is set up to help the poor, the black people, the less well-off, as slow as possible. I mean, the Red Cross is doing everything they can. We already realize a lot of people that could help are at war right now, fighting another way — and they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us! George Bush doesn’t care about black people!
I don’t know West’s politics, but I’d be willing to bet that you, perhaps Jerry, Iowa Jim etc. would classify him as a liberal based on that statement. Me, I think of him as an African-American with a legitimate complaint and a legitimate opinion.
K-Nuck:
Kanye (based solely on the statement you provided) isn’t an African American, conservative, liberal, martian, whathaveyou.
Mr. West is what I would call a “good person.”
Right you are, bb. I’d also call him a “good American”.
“Well, just a thought here, but the buses were LEAVING, police were trying to stop vehicles from ENTERING. Wouldn’t they just get out of the way and let the buses through?”
Not if you were trying to head west. The Gretna police were on that bridge, armed, and turning people attempting to flee the city back.
Just because they were part of the plan doesn’t mean they get used. Going back to my military strategy comparison, you spend a lot of time planning, but once the battle starts, you don’t just stick to the plan because it’s there. You go with what you are able to do, with what is working, and you dump everything else.
Why the hëll would they turn them BACK?!?!?
Kevin Drum is currently debunking myths on his blog. I’d like to see what the reality is of all these different police stories.
How many dumb things will it take for the moonbats to do the same with their crazy aunts in the closet?
Hey, we gave you Zell Miller, what more do you want?
Seriously, there are people who say stupid things on both sides. After all, it wasn’t that long ago that Pat Buchanan all but single-handedly sank the Bush I’s reelection with his “cultural war” convention speech.
I have no more use for Sharpton then you have for Robertson, but both men still command loyal followings in their respective parties.
Then there’s my current favorite wingnut, Rick Santorum, who feels that getting stranded in your antic for five days without food or water isn’t enough of a punishment for refusing to evacuate when told.
The point I’m trying to make is that Bill is accusing liberals of using the race card to foment racial hatred and that it’s a liberal specific issue. I say, “Bûllšhìŧ.” It is used equally on both sides. Now, in my further attempt for clarification, I hadn’t had my coffee yet.
In my defense, I was talking about “moonbats”, the extreme unthinking liberals, the polar opposits but intellectual equals of the conservative “wingnuts”. I certainly did not say racism is a liberal specific issue. In fact I think that more hardcore racists are “conservative” rather than “liberal” (though most of them probably don’t think hard enough to qualify for any philosophy).
As for the lack of coffee, amen, my brother. 3 cups a day of powdery Mexican expresso is all that stands between me and unconciousness.
But when the poorest areas of a city are the hardest hit by a Cat5 hurricane, and those areas are overwhelmingly populated with minorities, AND those areas are the last to receive aid, it would seem that the “race card” is perhaps not inappropriate to those who live at the mercy of relief efforts.
Maybe. Is there evidence that the white families that fled the city got aid before the black families that stayed? Is there evidence that white families that stayed got aid before black families did? I saw whites in the waters of New Orleans as well and, despite what some have predicted, no army helicopters swooped down and carried them off to Branson MO for the 9 o’clock Tony Orlando show.
I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, “They’re looting.” You see a white family, it says, “They’re looking for food.”
Ok, snopes.com has a good piece on this. Money quotes:
Jack Stokes, AP’s director of media relations, confirmed today that [photographer Dave] Martin says he witnessed the people in his images looting a grocery store. “He saw the person go into the shop and take the goods,” Stokes said, “and that’s why he wrote ‘looting’ in the caption.”
Regarding the AFP/Getty “finding” photo by [photographer Chris] Graythen, Getty spokeswoman Bridget Russel said, “This is obviously a big tragedy down there, so we’re being careful with how we credit these photos.” Russel said that Graythen had discussed the image in question with his editor and that if Graythen didn’t witness the two people in the image in the act of looting, then he couldn’t say they were looting.
The photographer who took the Getty/AFP picture, Chris Graythen, also posted the reasons behind his caption:
I wrote the caption about the two people who ‘found’ the items. I believed in my opinion, that they did simply find them, and not ‘looted’ them in the definition of the word. The people were swimming in chest deep water, and there were other people in the water, both white and black. I looked for the best picture. there were a million items floating in the water — we were right near a grocery store that had 5+ feet of water in it. it had no doors. the water was moving, and the stuff was floating away. These people were not ducking into a store and busting down windows to get electronics. They picked up bread and cokes that were floating in the water. They would have floated away anyhow.
We already realize a lot of people that could help are at war right now, fighting another way — and they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us! George Bush doesn’t care about black people!
Even beyond the incoherance…what exactly is he saying, that he wants even MORE National Guradsman to be available to shoot Blacks?–there is no evidence of truth here. Please provide evidence that orders were given to shoot black looters. Otherwise, this “good man” is just spouting off racial hatred.
(And, yes, I know that Blanco did mention something about shooting to kill. West is psecifically saying that “They” have permission to shoot “us”. Us? Million dollar rock stars who have to ask their managers how much they can give? Blacks? Time magazine cover subjects? Who?)
Reason isn’t necessarily the point, Bill. Perception is. This is how many blacks in America view the governments policies (as embodied by GWB) as directed towards them. Now as to the difference betweein “looting” and “finding”, I disagree. Someone’s in the store grabbing objects of necessity: food, water, etc. I see little difference between that and the guy grabbing floating loaves of bread and Twinkees. Now if they are in the sporting goods store taking boxes of Nikes, then I would agree.
“I don’t know West’s politics, but I’d be willing to bet that you, perhaps Jerry, Iowa Jim etc. would classify him as a liberal based on that statement. Me, I think of him as an African-American with a legitimate complaint and a legitimate opinion.”
“Mr. West is what I would call a “good person.”
Mr. West is what I would call a “well meaning but uninformed idiot.”
**I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, “They’re looting.” You see a white family, it says, “They’re looking for food.”**
On what planet? First, most the footage has been of blacks because they are about 90% or more of the victims still in NO. I haven’t seen that many white families on TV because there aren’t that many there. Plus, I saw more then a few media reports talking about families looking for food when they were taking food items. The news reports about looting have mostly been back dropped with footage of electronics and other like items being walked out of stores and floated down the street.
**And, you know, it’s been five days [waiting for federal help] because most of the people are black.**
No, it was five days because people tripped all over themselves. Some of those trippers on the local level were, if I may point it out, black themselves. What, they hated blacks too?
**… and those are my people down there.***
Funny, as an American I always thought of the people down there as my people as well. Guess I should quit caring now since they’re not.
**America is set up to help the poor, the black people, the less well-off, as slow as possible.**
BS. Sorry, but I’ve been part of rescue and emergency situations in the past and no one ever acted any differnt or with less effort due to any of those factors. The only thing we ever saw was human lives. Period.
Oh, and is America right now earmarking all its aid money and relief for rich white people only? Are there black people being cut out of the loop right now so that the well off can get aid? Are Americans donating with strings so that only 5% of what they give goes to black families and the poor?
**…they’ve given them permission to go down and shoot us!”
Really? Mr. West is looting electronic stores, jewelery stores and banks? Mr. West is shooting at rescue workers and law enforcement officers to cover for those looting those stores? He must be if he’s claiming to be part of the “we” that can be shot at. No one has issued a single order to shoot some one for just sitting on their front stoop. No one has been told to kill anybody just because they’re putting wood up over their house window. No one has put out an order to shoot on sight anyone just because they happen to be black. Find me that order and I’ll join you in outrage.
**George Bush doesn’t care about black people!**
Bush is an idiot who lives in a protective bubble. There are lots of people he shows little care for. It’s not a black thing.
This is a perfect example of the race card. Somebody like Sharpton is a calculated, manipulative liar who uses the race card for power and gain. Mr. West is an idiot.
He also has no tact. He can use his fame to express his opinion at anytime in the media. The fund raiser was not the place to do it. I know many people who aren’t right wingers who were turned off by that comment and turned the show off.
Since I haven’t commented on West here yet:
He’s entitled to his opinion just like everyone else. My only objection was his choice of forum. The telethon was a live broadcast intended to help raise money to help people suffering. To go “off script” just to score some political point was tasteless and inappropriate.
And, as I said earlier, it’s not black people Bush doesn’t care about. It’s poor people. He’s an equal-opportunity classist.
Den
“Reason isn’t necessarily the point, Bill. Perception is. This is how many blacks in America view the governments policies (as embodied by GWB) as directed towards them.”
Ok. Now turn the argument around.
David Duke comes out and says that most blacks are thugs and just live to bleed the life off America. He also says that most Latino males are lazy and worthless. I post that Davd Duke’s comments show that he is in fact nothing more then 20 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag.
Are you then going to post a defense of Duke by saying…
“Jerry, reason isn’t the point. Perception is the point. That’s how he and some others see it so it’s actually right of him to say it.”
I don’t think so.
Here’s what I think re: the whole race thing. No one was sitting around thinking “oh, it’s just a bunch of poor, black folk, no need to hurry.” And I don’t think things would have been different had the majority of Nawlens poor happened to be white…meaning, rescue administrators wouldn’t have said “dang, we need to mobilize NOW because them thar white folks is in trouble.” The disconnect, at least at the Federal level, wasn’t racist or even classist, it was just part and parcel of how this adminstration is run, heavy on the beauracracy (not unique to this administration) but also heavy on letting states deal with issues.
But that doesn’t mean racism isn’t involved. You do see it in the way the 2 photos were captioned, “found” as opposed to “looting.” It’s not a conscious thing, but like racial profiling (or as it used to be called, prejudice). If you see a pair of whites with a case of water, and you didn’t see them take it from a store, it’s “they found it.” Which is technically true, but where did the photographer think they found it at? On the public Dasani tree? Even if it had been washed out of a store by floodwaters, it still didn’t belong to them in the first place, and “finders keepers” is not a binding legal premise. By choosing to use such disparate labels, the photographer displays an underlying racial bias that most of us probably bear to some degree, even if we don’t realize it.
Now, those that get up on a soap box and claim racism, that’s a different matter. Kanye may mean well, but he is acting rather irresponsibly. Inciting any group of people into an antagonistic political stance, I don’t think, is warranted here. Although there is a part of me that wouldn’t mind seeing the GOP lose ground because of this.
Why the hëll would they turn them BACK?!?!?
Probably because they didn’t want “those people” in their town. I’m not sure, but I don’t think Gretna was the only one that did it.
=====================
RE: finding vs. looting: AP put up 2 photos of people with food, one had white people & said they found the food, the other had black people & said they were looters. The photographer disavowed the captions, but I don’t know if AP said anything.
The disconnect, at least at the Federal level, wasn’t racist or even classist, it was just part and parcel of how this adminstration is run, heavy on the beauracracy (not unique to this administration) but also heavy on letting states deal with issues.
Hm. There’s a quote floating around there that the emphasis was that it didn’t matter if there was a less than competent head, but that the WHITE HOOUSE could handle it, then it didn’t matter. Part and parcel of the implication being that they would let them cut down on the bureacracy in the agency; what they perhaps didn’t realize that what got left in the bureaucracy after the cutting were all the administrators and rule-enforcers and NOT the people who could perform the substance and guts of what the agency was supposed to do.
Roger, I think you summarize it well. Too many middle level managers that needed to get the thumbs up from higher up the chain. From what I’ve read, under Clinton’s administration, the head of FEMA reported directly to the President, meaning simple phone call was all that was needed to get direct presidential authority. When Bush moved FEMA to DHS, he put one level of beauracracy into that chain. And while it seems that Bush was hard to reach by phone, if can’t have helped that Brownie used a freaking memo to request a go ahead from Chertoff. And while it could be that Brown did in fact also use the phone, I’ve not seen that documented anywhere, and high level calls of that sort do get documented.
It’s not bureaucracy per se that’s bad; after all, ALL large organizations depend on it to some extent or another. It’s how you organize it that’s key.
I am less than convinced that this current administration knows how to do this; Bush the younger was less than an stunning success as a businessman and it’s not his expertise. Their approach to government is leavened with a great deal of contempt for the mechanisms of government, without realizing that a) mechanisms rely on people with expertise, knowledge and experience that are vital to running government and b) an efficient government runs along the same lines that an efficient corporation runs along.
RE: finding vs. looting: AP put up 2 photos of people with food, one had white people & said they found the food, the other had black people & said they were looters. The photographer disavowed the captions, but I don’t know if AP said anything.
This is commonly reported but untrue. One was from Ap. The other was from AFP.
This is commonly reported but untrue. One was from Ap. The other was from AFP.
And this small fact makes a difference, because…?
“And this small fact makes a difference, because…?”
Because we have 2 different perspectives from 2 different people from 2 different companies, you race-baiting goofball.
The photographer who described the white humans stated that he saw many humans of many colours in the area and yes the frocery store was flooded and food was flowign freely throuhgout.
They found it.
While the other photog stated that he witnesed looting.
Racism racism everywhere, if we can’t find it, we’ll pull it from thin air.
And this small fact makes a difference, because…?
Ummm…well, the implication was that the same company was taking essentially the same photo and giving it a different captian based solely
Now we discover that:
A- the photos do not show the same thing, according to witnesses
B- it was NOT the same company that labled them
and
C- none of this will matter to those who are bound and determined to see a racial angle in as many events as possible, facts be dámņëd.
(in case it isn’t clear, AFP stands for Agence France-Presse while Ap stands for Associated Press. Different companies. Not the same place. What one does has nothing to do with the other.)
Except, Bill, the only impliocation that I ever heard, referred to ‘the media’, in general, making those distinctions. Not the same company, or even the same person within that company.
TonyPseudonym, unless your position is that each news agency only has one person doing the captions, then much of the point being made is the same, regardless.
Unless, of course, one company was the media branch of the KKK and the other a branch of the Rainbow Coilition. Then it might be a distinction worth making… *g*
See, this is why I hate the race card and its use so much. It gets overplayed to the point of utter uselessness and nonsense.
I’ve come across racists of all colors and backgrounds in my life. Since joining the force I’ve even met a few officers (thankfully almost all from other agencies) who had racist tendencies that made them, shall we say, not my favorite people. I know that racism is alive and well out there amongst whites, blacks, hispanics, asians and others. But I also know from experience that it is the minority of each group that holds these ideas.
So what do the Jacksons, Sharptons and far left do whenever they open their mindless rhetoric spewing mouths? They play the race card. They play it for everything. And they dilute the strength of any real argument that they might have on any given subject and give the other side a whole lotta ammo.
There are people out there who are middle of the road in their politics or who are really nonpolitical in nature. Sway that group and you get the majority vote. The far right wingers have been stomping the far left wingers to death in that fight and, by extension, stomping the moderate left as well.
How? Simple. The far right, even when it lies, sounds sane compared to the far left. Look at the stories of the buses or the levees. Play with numbers and dates just enough to look good and shift the truth. Look at global warming. Play the most out there voice for the position and then present an argument that, even if it is absolutely meaningless and wrong in every way, is against the position but sounds good.
The left anymore comes off sounding like an escaped mental patient or a paranoid delusional. Why? One of the main reasons for this is the far left’s need to play the race card in every argument. Even for a hurricane it seems.
*What happens if Roberts becomes a Supreme Court Justice? Why, he’ll roll back civil rights at every turn! He’ll make life for blacks in America just like it was before the marches!
*What’ll happen if the Republicans can take more seats in the next election? Why, they’ll be stripping rights from blacks so much that it’ll be slavery again for all that it really matters.
*Why is Bush letting so many people die in New Orleans? Why, it’s because Bush hates black people and wants to see them die. It’s because he and Cheney and Rove worked out that, if they let enough blacks die today, they can win the future elections later because the Dems will have less of a voter base.
*Why is Bush pushing the bad strategies that are killing so many in Iraq? Why, because we all know that most of the people in the army are poor dumb black people who only joined to escape the government inflicted poverty of their inner city neighborhoods. plus, while Bush is letting the blacks (who he hates) die, he gets to see lots of brown people in Iraq die too. Double fun!!!
*Why did those cops shoot the guy holding a gun and committing a crime? He was black!!! We all know cops are all racists and having standing unwritten orders to kill and harass as many blacks as they can to fill their “quota.”
*Do you know why, if your poor and black, you shouldn’t bother trying to get a job anyhow? It’s just gonna go to whitey to keep you down.
*Do you know why the government has been sitting on an AIDS cure for fifteen years now? Because AIDS was introduced into the poor black communities to “thin the herd” a bit. It was government sanctioned genocide against blacks in Africa and America. Once the racist government fell that enough blacks have died… Well, then the cure will come out.
I hear all of that at least once a week because of where I work. I see it on the TV when I turn on the chat shows and the news. Do you know what it’s doing? It’s numbing the mainstream to the charge of racism to the point that even any charge with merit just gets met with rolled eyes. Oh, look. The left is crying wolf about racism and playing the race card to get attention and smear someone. What’s new?
The far right (hëll, the moderate right) is laughing its ášš off. Because, on top of the left beating that card to death, the far left is handing them loads of ammo. The best trick the right has right now is finding a large enough group or a public enough figure crying “race card” (or some other wingnut thing from the playbook) and painting the entire opposition with that brush.
*The Right: “Hey, look at those nuts on the left. Bush caused Katrina to kill black people? Bush caused the people to stay and held up relief just because he hates blacks and wanted them to die? You wanna be associated with that kind of loony tune space case? No? I don’t blame you. Neither would I nor any other sane person.”
The vast majority of Americans don’t hold racist views and the vast majority of Americans know this. Part of that vast majority is the sane middle ground and the apolitical masses. They would not let a handful of people bring back slavery, kill blacks for fun, strip away civil rights or turn their backs on dieing people because of their skin color. When your biggest gun is something as far fetched as most of the race card charges are…. Well… You don’t win people over. As a matter of fact you begin to piss people off to the point that they stop listening (even at times of real crime or need involving race) at best or you push them to the other side at worst.
You guys wanna help Bush get out of this with less damage then he might otherwise do? Yes? Then keep beating that race issue into the ground and making yourselves and the side you’re on look stupid. Then pat yourselves on the back when 2008 rolls around and give us a third glorious term of Republicans in the White house and running the House and Senate.
Except, Bill, the only implication that I ever heard, referred to ‘the media’, in general, making those distinctions. Not the same company, or even the same person within that company.
Well, if you read the email that snopes has at its site, it states that The Associated Press has separately captioned two photos of looters in the wake of Katrina. The photo of a black man refers to his “looting,” and the photo of a white pair refers to their “finding.” I would like to know why this happened.
I first saw the photos at Wonkette’s site, where she asked for an “apology” from AP. The site now has been amended to make her look less foolish.
The original complaint was actually against Yahoo News for carrying both pictures. Later it was against AP. Otherwise it’s just the amazing, unbelievable story that two different events witnessed by two different reporters and published by two different companies have, wait for it, two different captions.
And this is the outrage that Mr. West saw fit to mention.
Jerry C. You’re very smart.
They probably won’t listen. Right now that suits me fine but in the long run it will be bad for us all so the better part of me hopes the sane left smartens up.
Kudos, Jerry — well said.
Considering how good this administration is at drumming up attention-getting events that just happen to distract from whatever scandal they’re currently working through, the last thing we need is to hand them a free source of ammunition. I’d much rather focus on all the things they’re obviously doing wrong than drum up conspiracy theories.
TWL
Eh, I still greet your amazing ‘news’ with a shrug, Bill. But then, I haven’t really followed that particular incident with the same dedication you have, so…
I feel I should probably also mention that I’m not exactly in full agreement with Kanye West here, as I realize that I may be giving the impression otherwise. (I’m also tired to the point of loopiness, and this, combined with my normally hamfisted way of stringing words together, makes me suddenly very wary of the way I may be coming across… *g*)
I don’t think Bush hates black people. I don’t think he’s really given much thought to anyone outside his very small bubble world, but that’s a very different thing from being racist.
Personally, I think the whole thing can be ascribed much more reasonably to incompitence on pretty much every level of government involved. Though there may very well have been a dose of indefference there as well.
Also, Jerry, I pretty much agree with your points about the overuse of race. I’d go into more detail, but my eyelids are starting to do that thing where they meet in the middle of my eye, and it’s making it hard to see the screen…
“David Duke comes out and says that most blacks are thugs and just live to bleed the life off America. He also says that most Latino males are lazy and worthless. I post that Davd Duke’s comments show that he is in fact nothing more then 20 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag.”
Am I going to post an argument against that? No. He’s certainly welcome to his opinions, however. And one has nothing to do with the other.
For christ’s sake, give West a break. The guy was speaking from the heart. Whether or not it was the most succinct argument ever made in defense of his belief that George Bush and the White House are persecuting blacks doesn’t really matter. It’s what he felt (and it echoes the sentiments of many). I agree with Bill, Den, et. al.: Bush’s lack of caring is colorblind, as long as the color is green (meaning hefty campaign donations, not bribing the guy before someone gets all up in my piece).
Now to Jerry’s piece: What I find interesting is that he hears the “rantings of the loonies on the left”, but what about the rantings of the loonies on the right? No offense, dude, but when Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity go off about the people who were stupid enough to stay behind they are (whether we like it or not) making racial generalizations. The MAJORITY of those affected by Katrina are black. Yes, Katrina really didn’t give a šhìŧ if you were white, black Puerto Rican, green, or from Mars. If you were a human, and you were still in Katrina’s path, Katrina would fûçk you (bonus points to anyone who knows the song that I cribbed that from, and even more bonus points if anyone can explain the irony of me quoting it in my post about racism).
I don’t disagree about the rantings of the left. However, I feel just as strongly about the rantings on the right. Ann Coulter is a fûçkìņg homicidal nutjob who should be incarcerated. Michael Savage should be taken out of by the Mossad and sent to a re-education camp. Bill O’Reilly is just a blowhard áššhølë, and Sean Hannity is a fûçkìņg idiot (much more so than Kanye West, thank you very much).
The left’s problem isn’t just their loony rantings, the left’s problems is their unwillingness to get their hands dirty. We Washington State Democrats haven’t got any such problems on a statewide basis (but please, don’t get me started about the PC-a-riffic morons in the city of Seattle). Hëll, we just stole ANOTHER election from the Republicans, and I’m dámņ proud of it. The left also is unwilling to take the fight to the Repubes. The GOP frames the debate in terms of fear: who we should fear, why we should fear them and how we can stop fearing them. Unfortunately for everyone in America, they haven’t the faintest idea how to deliver on those promises. The Dems either need to re-frame the debate on why we shouldn’t fear anyone, and how we are going to make the US and the rest of the world as safe as can be. They haven’t done it worth a šhìŧ, and I fear they probably never will.
Al Sharpton rules.
I’m assuming this is a fake, but that doesn’t make it any less amusing. Read the note that GW is writing:
It’s a good thing the study hall teacher didn’t catch him…
(again, hope the HTML is correct)
The guy was speaking from the heart. Whether or not it was the most succinct argument ever made in defense of his belief that George Bush and the White House are persecuting blacks doesn’t really matter. It’s what he felt
See, that to me is one of the problems we have today–people can talk without any concern for facts as long as it’s hat they feel. Big frikkin whoop. I can feel any and all sorts of useless things but if I can’t back them up with some hard facts I can’t think of any reason why anyone should give a rat’s ášš.
when Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity go off about the people who were stupid enough to stay behind they are (whether we like it or not) making racial generalizations. The MAJORITY of those affected by Katrina are black. Yes, Katrina really didn’t give a šhìŧ if you were white, black Puerto Rican, green, or from Mars. If you were a human, and you were still in Katrina’s path, Katrina would fûçk you).
I don’t see how that could be legitimately considered a racial generalization. I also disagree with the premise–not everyone was as informed as most of here were. Yeah, i would have gotten the hëll out of Dodge and I would hope that anyone who knows the facts as I do would make the same choice–but I can’t know what it was that the folks left behind knew.
Ann Coulter is a fûçkìņg homicidal nutjob who should be incarcerated. Michael Savage should be taken out of by the Mossad and sent to a re-education camp
I’ll assume you’re joking since it has to be a basic tenant of liberalism that you don’t incarcerate or kidnap people just because they disagree with you, even if they use harsh language and hurtful words when doing so.
Hëll, we just stole ANOTHER election from the Republicans, and I’m dámņ proud of it.
Well, I have to admire the honesty! 🙂
Bill and Tim,
Thanks for the kind words.
“For christ’s sake, give West a break. The guy was speaking from the heart. Whether or not it was the most succinct argument ever made in defense of his belief that George Bush and the White House are persecuting blacks doesn’t really matter. It’s what he felt (and it echoes the sentiments of many).”
Why? I’ll no more give him a break for being an idiot then I ever have given a break to all the righties you mentioned in your post. Saying something stupid is saying something stupid.
Again, you use an argument that cuts both ways. Why don’t you give Savage a break. The guy speaks from the heart. Whether or not its always the most succinct argument ever made in defense of his beliefs about race, America and the world (and it echoes the sentiments of many by the look of his ratings) it doesn’t really matter.
It’s a weak defense for what West said. You talk about taking a stand and make snide comments about the PC-a-riffic morons in the city of Seattle as though you’re not being PC-a-riffic here. You are. West said something stupid and said it at a stupid time. Don’t be PC and excuse it. Refute it.
I’ll give my last breath to argue against the stupid comments about race from West, Duke, Savage, Sharpton and any other twit you care to mention. I’ve posted more then a few times about what a**holes I think O’Reilly, Savage, Hannity, Coulter and Rush are. Several of those posts are in this thread. I’ll do the same against comments like those of West.
You excuse it all you want. Just know that your part of the problem that helps to facilitate the use of the race card and the continued belief of some people in its charges by your actions.
“What I find interesting is that he hears the “rantings of the loonies on the left”, but what about the rantings of the loonies on the right?”
Gee, 90% of my posts are about the rantings of the loonies on the right(many of the same you mention yourself.) I post one thing about the biggest bonehead argument the loonies on the left use and all the other posts fall down the memory hole.
“No offense, dude, but when Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity go off about the people who were stupid enough to stay behind they are (whether we like it or not) making racial generalizations.”
OK. Another race card were there isn’t a race issue. There were some people (not all mind you) who were stupid enough to stay by choice. People were dumb enough to refuse to leave when rescue came both before and after landfall. That’s a fact that was shown on live TV before and after Katrina hit.
How is pointing out that some of the people in NO were stupid a racial generalization? Was it a racial generalization when they pointed out what thugs and idiots some people (mostly all white)were after they became a mob riot after a rock concert? How was it a racial generalization when they pointed out what criminals people (again, mostly white) were at the some of the WTO riots? I think those guys are pinheads but you can’t slam them for pointing out a fact. Now, if they had said that people stayed because they were black and blacks were stupid then you might have a case. But they didn’t and you don’t.
Plus, you seemed to have missed a big point. The right has really good liars. I said as much. The left however has really bad liars. I hate both crews. But when you look at how the right has learned to lie smart while the left just screams “race” so often….. And here you stand defending both West and the continued use of the race card. Well done.
Step one on that need to re-frame the debate thing is quit excusing the race card or the people who use it. Until you do you just hand the right more ammo and line yourself up against the wall.
i think West’s statements are important because they’re a symptom of a problem.
there is a lot of subtle racism out there. the sort of thing a moderate white guy wouldn’t notice.
i don’t think it’s necessarily that there are that many white guys intent on keeping the black man down. one hundred years of slavery and another hundred or so of seperate but equal knocked him down. so far down that getting back up requires a herculean effort. they have to overcome the terrible inertia of black american history.
then every once in awhile a story comes along like the CIA being complicit in running drugs in the inner cities. a story that seemed obvious tin-hat territory until the CIA admitted it was true. now , i don’t think this was part of a conspiracy to keep the black man down. i think it was a case of the government choosing allies poorly (in this case, the Contras). however, you can see how this sort of a revelation feeds suspicion.
people grow up in poverty seeing their peers struggling so hard just to get along. a lot of people give up.
now, it’s their choice to give up. but i would say that every black person who gives up (turns to crime, drugs, etc . . .) that makes it harder for everyone in their community. the downward spiral gains momentum.
those of us more fortunate have a duty to do what we can to help. not guilt because of our history, but responsibility because of our present. as our fellow human beings, they deserve our help.
to get to my point. the level of poverty in black (and other minority) populations is a problem.
saying it’s their fault for being stupid/lazy or saying that it’s because all white people are racist are both easy but misleading answers. they are simple answers to a complex problem, and because of their simplicity, they’re attractive.
their oversimplicity also makes them destructive.
i don’t have a solution, but i think it’s important that people recognize that there is a problem, and not just point to over-the-top statements by people like West or Farrakhan and say, “those people are crazy.” yeah, there’s a madness there, but there’s method in it. we have to remember that the boy crying wolf may actually be right that one time.
btw, i know Sharpton’s past is a little checkered, but his 2004 DNC speech just rocked.
Jerry C. made a lot of points about how race is injected into a lot of issues that don’t seem to be racially connected. I’d agree with that. But the bigger point of Jerry’s comments is that the GOP is winning elections on perceptions, not facts. They’ve become exceedingly adept at the sound byte, repitition, and subtle undermining of the opposition, and it’s secured them an increased presence in the government.
So, two points. First off, while many times when the race issue is injected into a political statement, there’s no actual connection to the discussion (such as anything Katrina related is a racial issue), the fact that it’s very easy to raise the issue of racial prejudice indicates to me that it is still very much a serious problem that this country faces.
Second, perceptions. In some way, maybe the minority left has picked up on the GOP’s strategies, although they aren’t very good at it. If they scream “racism” often enough, sooner or later, enough of the voting public is going to take that to heart, and into the booth with them. Watching the CNN coverage of the hurricane, and listening to some of the comments from Bush, Brown, Chertoff, and others, at some point I looked at my wife and said “the GOP just lost a good portion of their black vote.” Not because I think this administration is racist, but because you could see that the perception that they were racist has not been created, and it’s going to be an extremely uphill battle for the GOP to recover from that.
Here’s the thing about basing your elections on misdirection, manipulation, and subtle lies: sooner or later, the voters are going to catch on. If Bush had avoided accepting any responsibility for the lethargic Federal response to Katrina, I think that would have broken the GOP hold on the government. As it is, we may still see a swing during the next elections, and the next GOP presidential candidate does face a stiff challenge. Because the past 5 years have really strained the credibility of the GOP, and unless they start taking steps now to get some public confidence back, all the repitition and cute catch phrases in the world won’t help them win another round of elections.
I don’t disagree about the rantings of the left. However, I feel just as strongly about the rantings on the right.
That’s because the right has better propoganda writers than the left.
Why do you think Bush flip-flopped on firing the leaker in the Plame probe? The man can’t live without Karl Rove.
Bill Mulligan: I’ll assume you’re joking since it has to be a basic tenant of liberalism that you don’t incarcerate or kidnap people just because they disagree with you, even if they use harsh language and hurtful words when doing so.
Jerry C.: Again, you use an argument that cuts both ways. Why don’t you give Savage a break. The guy speaks from the heart.
Of course I’m joking, Bill. But neither action would break my heart.
Jerry: The difference between West and Savage is that I don’t believe that Savage is speaking from the heart. I don’t think he actually has a heart. I think everything he says is calcuated to help feed the rage that the right feels about the left.
I don’t see how that could be legitimately considered a racial generalization. I also disagree with the premise–not everyone was as informed as most of here were. Yeah, i would have gotten the hëll out of Dodge and I would hope that anyone who knows the facts as I do would make the same choice–but I can’t know what it was that the folks left behind knew.
Well, ask the blacks that do see it that way. You and Jerry both seem to be saying that there is NO possible way that anyone should be able to interpret the actions of the government post-Katrina as being racially guided. Sitting here, behind my computer in Seattle I can see quite plainly that the recovery efforts weren’t racially motivated. There was no Grand Wizard of FEMA sitting somewhere saying “Get the white folks out first.” But keep this in mind: over 80% of the population that lives below poverty-level in NO is black. The majority of that population lives in the areas that were the hardest hit. These are people that have felt persecuted their entire lives because of their skin color. It really doesn’t matter if it’s logical, it’s how they are going to interpret it. They don’t need Al Sharpton out there saying “It’s the white man trying to put the brother down” for them as that is how they already feel.
I post one thing about the biggest bonehead argument the loonies on the left use and all the other posts fall down the memory hole.
Actually, that’s not true. I probably didn’t read them in the first place. Sorry about that.
And here you stand defending both West and the continued use of the race card. Well done.
I’m defending a guy who said what he really felt, and said what I think is in the minds of many blacks throughout the country.
How is pointing out that some of the people in NO were stupid a racial generalization? Was it a racial generalization when they pointed out what thugs and idiots some people (mostly all white)were after they became a mob riot after a rock concert? How was it a racial generalization when they pointed out what criminals people (again, mostly white) were at the some of the WTO riots?
You discount the power of television. Hannity and O’Reilly’s coverage of the looting showed almost exclusively black offenders. What were they taking (for the most part) in those videos? Food. Water. Necessities of survival (from what I saw). I didn’t see anyone taking a big screen TV or a pair of Adidas (although I’m sure it happened). How were they referred to? As looters. In MY mind, that’s racial bias. Do they need to start referring to them as “darkies” or something equally noxious? No. It’s how you frame the image and the debate. So yes, I do think I have a point. I was here for WTO, and it was the most annoying display of reactionary liberalism ever. The sad thing is that all of the trouble was caused by a few groups of people that showed up for the sole purpose of destroying property. And if the two-headed moron of Paul Schell and Norm Stamper had had an ounce of foresight between them, they could have prevented almost all the chaos.
Here’s one fun experiment you can try at home while watching the news: if a person is white, see if their color or ethnicity is mentioned. If a person is non-white, see if that is mentioned. Count the number of times skin color or ethnicity is mentioned for both.
I’m not being PC and excusing West’s comment. I think he has a valid point. Period. You disagree. When I talk about the PC-a-riffic politics in Seattle, I’m talking about the city that won’t allow circuses in the city limits because they are cruel to animals. I’m talking about the city that had a 17 year long moratorium on strip clubs. I’m talking about the city that embraces green building, yet can’t get a public transit system worth a šhìŧ built. I’m talking about a city that wants to put a four foot ban between strippers and patrons in place.
“You and Jerry both seem to be saying that there is NO possible way that anyone should be able to interpret the actions of the government post-Katrina as being racially guided.”
No, I’m saying that people out there do believe it. I’m also saying that anybody who doesn’t (as you just stated you don’t) should argue the point with them rather then excuse their use of the race issue.
The race card is, to me, just as bad as racism and should be treated the same. When you see it you speak out against it and fight it. Anything less is allowing it to continue and grow and is inexcusable in my book.
“You discount the power of television. Hannity and O’Reilly’s coverage of the looting showed almost exclusively black offenders.”
No, I’m not. And, as we coverd before, that’s bacause most the victims still there are black. I would think it would be a wee bit more racist if 98% of the victims were black but we kept being shown the few remaining white families 90% of the time. “Screw the black suffering in NO. Go find me same footage of WHITE people to show on TV. Then maybe our viewers will care.” Yeah…
Two issues with looting here. Looting is a word that by definition applies to what is going on. Would it be nice if more on Fox news pointed out that the looting was an act of survival when it came to food? Yeah. But the hamfisted nature of Fox News on issues like this and the general a**holeness of the two you point out are part of the reason I don’t watch Fox that much anymore and slap them around whenever I get the chance. That and the fact that they started reading G.O.P. talking points on air as though it were news. Looting is also being done with non-food items. That’s what is getting most the air time elsewhere. It’s also not played up the way some on Fox have done. Food looting is being described as an act of survival. Turn Fox off some evening and somebody else on.
“I think he has a valid point. Period. You disagree.”
But half of your own argument says that he doesn’t have a valid point. You state that you know that there was no race issues involved with Katrina. He says there is. If there wasn’t then he doesn’t have a valid point. All he has is idiocy.
I come out and say that I feel that you’re ripping me off and holding me down. We’ve never met. This is the only exchange of any kind we have ever had. But, dámņ it, I feel that you’re doing me wrong. I percieve it as that. It really doesn’t matter if it’s logical. That’s what I feel. Are you going to say that I have a valid point? Are you going to come out and say that I’m right even though the facts show that I’m 100% wrong but my feelings are all that matters?
It’s the same thing here. He is speaking with no facts to back what he is saying. Half the problems with race and PC in this country is that no one will hold statements about race to the test of facts. It’s all about feelings. Screw that. You wanna fix things you start fighting it and you speak out against it rather then excusing it. If you don’t… Well, then you’re part of the problem too.