Are we in the 1960s? Is Richard Nixon the current president? Are race politics the only defense of scoundrel Obama Dimocrats? We’re scratching our heads thinking we are in a time tunnel.
Tonight America will be subjected to another Barack Obama publicity stunt. The Obama publicity stunt to be staged tonight is a nationally televised speech on the Iraq War. We will not be surprised at any fairy tale or lie from Obama nor will we be surprised if Obama utters the Nixonian “Peace With Honor” as he proceeds with the George W. Bush Iraq withdrawal timetable.
This past weekend Obama borrowed from Richard Nixon when he declared he snubbed the Glenn Beck “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington, D.C. The Obamas were too busy on Martha’s Vineyard to bother with the hundreds of thousands massing in Washington.
Obama sounded Nixonesque. In 1969, after the anti-Vietnam War Moratorium, Richard Nixon, with more politeness and savvy than Barack Obama, also ignored Americans who raised their voices in the streets. In 1969 Richard Nixon declared he was listening, not to street protests, but to the great “Silent Majority” that eventually did lead him to reelection victory in 1972. Barack Obama must be hearing voices from an imaginary “silent majority” too but unlike in 1969 the “silent majority” is already in the streets and not so silent.
Richard Nixon thought there was a “silent majority” that supported his policies. The “dirty tricks” and unlawful methods Nixon deployed in 1972 were not necessary to win reelection because indeed a great many Americans supported Nixon. In contrast Barack Obama does not have majority support. Obama Dimocrats do not have majority support.
“Democrats thought things couldn’t get much worse on the electoral front — and then they went home to campaign.
A new Gallup poll released Monday shows Republicans with a record 10-point edge over Democrats on the “generic ballot” test — the question of whether voters prefer a Democratic or Republican congressional candidate. It’s the largest GOP polling edge at this stage in the 68 years of the generic ballot poll.
While party optimists say Democrats may cling to a small majority after the November election, an increasing number of Democratic strategists now say privately that they fear the House is already lost.
The Gallup poll, coming at the end of a brutal August for Democrats and President Barack Obama, reinforces the rapidly forming prevailing view that the horizon is as bleak for Democrats as it ever has been.[snip]
Worse for Democrats, the news comes after they’ve spent most of the last month on the campaign trail, touting their accomplishments for local communities and trying to remind voters of what life was like when George W. Bush was president.”
Whatever consent from the governed Obama and Obama Dimocrats extracted in November 2008 is now gone. The Culture of Corruption and the incompetence and the failures have drained consent away. There should also be no doubt now that there is a racial component to opposition to Obama and his Obama Dimocrats – however that racial component is not the one Big Media indulges in. The racial animus comes from Obama and Obama Dimocrats against ordinary Americans. In the very same interview in which Barack Obama on Sunday declared his disdain for the “Restoring Honor” rally, Obama again expressed his contempt for “bitter” and “clingy” small town America.
There cannot now be any doubt that “small town America”, “bitter” and “clingy” are Obama references to White people, particularly working class White people.
This past Sunday The Confluence published a retrospective of “best of/worst of” columns. One of the mocked columns is Changing of the Guard written by Chris Bowers, formerly of the website (he’s now at DailyKooks) we refer to as “Nothing Left”.
At The Confluence, MaBlue2 wrote this about “Changing of the Guard”: “I challenge anyone out there to come up with something this guffaw inducing.” We don’t think this is a “guffaw inducing” article but rather a nausea inducing article. Indeed that article is one of the clearest expositions of the “Mistake In ’08” we have written so often about (and we have much more to write about). Here are excerpts from “Changing of the Guard” written on May 8, 2008 to celebrate the supposed triumph of Obama and Obamaism:
“So, unless Obama somewhat surprisingly does not become the next President of the United States, the Democratic Party will experience its first changing of the guard since the late 1980’s. What differences will be in store? Here are the three major changes I expect:
1. Cultural Shift: Out with Bubbas, up with Creatives: There should be a major cultural shift in the party, where the southern Dems and Liebercrat elite will be largely replaced by rising creative class types. Obama has all the markers of a creative class background, from his community organizing, to his Unitarianism, to being an academic, to living in Hyde Park to shopping at Whole Foods and drinking PBR. These will be the type of people running the Democratic Party now, and it will be a big cultural shift from the white working class focus of earlier decades. Given the demographics of the blogosphere, in all likelihood, this is a socioeconomic and cultural demographic into which you fit. Culturally, the Democratic Party will feel pretty normal to netroots types. It will consistently send out cultural signals designed to appeal primarily to the creative class instead of rich donors and the white working class.
2. Policy Shift: Out with the DLC, up with technocratic wonks. My sense of Obama and his policy team is overwhelmingly one of technocratic, generally less overtly ideological professional policy types. [snip]
3. Coalition reorganization: Out with party silos, in with squishy goo-goos. In addition to a shift in culture and policy focus, I also expect a different approach to coalition building. A long-standing Democrats approach of transactional politics with different issue and demographic silos in the party shift toward an emphasis on good government (goo goo) approaches.”
While there is a high level of stupidity, dementia, and delusion in that article there is one huge triumph. The White Working Class have indeed been jack-booted out of the Obama Dimocratic Party with forethought and purpose. The elderly have also been booted out, or walked out, of the grand coalition which was once the FDR/Hillary Clinton Democratic Party.
While the malice aforethought of the purge of Working Class Whites is something we have repeatedly written about (see HERE for example regarding the White Working Class and Health Care, and HERE for the theoretical justifications for the Obama “situation comedy” coalition) there is something much deeper at play here. There is a profound hatred of White People.
At every turn in the political debate, Obama Dimocrats especially those ensonced in Hopium Dens, shout “racism”. It’s race this, race that. There’s always a newly discovered “dog whistle” heard by the Obama JournoListers and protection squads. There’s always some new and super secret “racist code language” deciphered. But there is never a discussion of the hate displayed towards White people every day in the Hopium Dens and in Big Media.
Those predominately White “honky” Big Blog White Boys sure hate white people. This “creative class” thinks of Black people like gentle pets to be patted on the head and love to indulge in the self-hate of anti-White bigotry.
The “honky” Big Blog White Boys are frat-housed together shouting insults and mooning Tea Party activists (because the Tea Parties demonstrate they are capable of organizing street protests unlike the Big Blog Boys). These well educated White boys must know that adding groups to a coalition is the smart way to politically organize (not their politics of subtraction of groups and division). Knowing in politics you add, not subtract, these Big Blog Boys and Obama Dimocrats persisted in their hate of White people and goal of driving out the White Working Class from consideration as a coalition member in the Obama Dimocratic Party.
In earlier articles we discussed how Hillary Clinton could have “healed the breach” in the Democratic Party caused by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. We wrote about how Lyndon Johnson after signing the great Act continued to fight for White Working Class votes and how Lady Bird Johnson toured the South in pursuit of those aims. But the well educated White Boys from Big Blogs insisted Obama be president and that Whites are racists. Why is this?
Sexism and misogyny explain part of the spiteful rage. But in the attacks on Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin there is a strong class hatred exhibited. Both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin appealed strongly to White Working Class voters and therefore they became objects of derision to the Obama Left. It wasn’t always this way.
In 1968 Bobby Kennedy visited Hazard County Kentucky as part of his Appalachia tour. Bobby Kennedy, with all his many massive faults, is mourned in large part because he too could have united Black people and the White Working Class “towards a more perfect Union”.
Today a politician who inspires White people is a target of suspicion and hatred – from the Obama Left and the Nutroots Nation of Nutopia. The hate of White people extends to all aspects of American life from these nuts. The creatures of hate hiding at the Big Blogs were created by the Howard Dean campaign and they will not allow any discussion of race without polluting such a discussion with the “racist” tag. Shelby Steele, notes the irony of Dean’s creations turning against him:
“In 2004, when Howard Dean reached out to “guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks,” Shelby Steele wrote that this was “absolutely verboten. Racial identity is simply forbidden to whites in America” because of their history and white guilt.”
“Breathing While White” is now a crime – ask a black man – ask Kelefa Sanneh. Kelefa Sanneh wrote an article in the New Yorker that only a black man could write because a white person would immediately get the “racist” tag on the toe. In the “Beyond The Pale“, published this past April, the hatred of White people was discussed:
“But what of it? Why is it that, from Christian Lander to Jon Stewart, a diagnosis of whiteness is often delivered, and received, as a kind of accusation? The answer is that the diagnosis is often accompanied by an implicit or explicit charge of racism. It’s become customary to suppose that a measure of discrimination is built into whiteness itself, a racial category that has often functioned as a purely negative designation: to be white in America is to be not nonwhite, which is why it was possible, in 1961, for a white woman from Kansas living in Hawaii to give birth to a black baby. In a marvellously splenetic essay, “On Being White . . . And Other Lies,” James Baldwin argued that America had, really, “no white community”—only a motley alliance of European immigrants and their descendants, who made a “moral choice” (even if they didn’t realize it) to join a synthetic racial élite. And, in the nineteen-nineties, a cohort of scholars took up Baldwin’s charge, popularizing a field of research that came to be known as whiteness studies. In 1994, the white labor historian David R. Roediger published an incendiary volume, “Towards the Abolition of Whiteness.” Paying special attention to unions and strikes, he traced the unsteady growth of American whiteness, a category that eventually included many previous identities that had once been considered marginal: Irish, Italian, Polish, Jewish. “It is not merely that whiteness is oppressive and false; it is that whiteness is nothing but oppressive and false,” he wrote. “Whiteness describes, from Little Big Horn to Simi Valley, not a culture but precisely the absence of culture. It is the empty and therefore terrifying attempt to build an identity based on what one isn’t and on whom one can hold back.” In his view, fighting racism wasn’t enough; white people who wanted to oppose oppression would have to do battle with whiteness itself. Nearly two decades later, amid a rancorous debate over our first black President, the idea of abolishing whiteness seems no less tantalizing—and no less remote.”
“Driving While Black” is a closely watched phenomenon but few pay attention to “Breathing While White”. Read Sanneh’s essay then read Fratboy Whiteboy David Sirota at Nothing Left:
“I’m finishing up my book right now, and am on a chapter about race and white privilege. During my research, I came upon this lengthy article on the Tea Party movement in the latest edition of the American Prospect. It provides a telling (if mundane) example of how in our persistently racist politics, all roads – even “progressive” ones – always seem to lead back to deifying white privilege.[snip]
In other words, instead of building the strength of progressives’ burgeoning multicultural coalition through overtly anti-racist themes that explicitly challenge white privilege, the American Prospect asks progressives to fight white privilege by immediately privileging political messages that coddle privileged whites – that is, by trimming the progressive message into one that makes sure not to offend/counter white resentment. This, despite the resounding electoral success of progressives’ multicultural coalition in the last two elections, and despite Census data showing America will soon be a majority minority (read: non-white) country.[snip]
But that’s the whole point: White privilege in America today is so omniscient, so assumed, so embedded in everything, that it is even forwarded by some liberal voices as the answer to the very problems it creates. And the fact that so many of the liberal voices that inadvertently perpetuate these rhetorical parameters (particularly magazines, pundits and think tanks inside the cloistered Beltway) are catering to a mostly white privileged audience of elites means that they rarely – if ever – are called out for their contribution to an inherently racist paradigm.”
For David Sirota “White People Need Not Apply” – they are “racists” and are obsessed with “racist White privilege.” All White people are “racists” except of course the well educated and very privileged white frat boys who write for predominantly white Big Media and predominantly white Big Blogs.
To these white frat boys on Big Blogs, Bobby Kennedy is nothing but a dead “racist” and nothing but a honky loaded up with White privilege. If Sirota and his readers are right that America will soon be a “majority minority” country – White people may ironically have to demand Affirmative Action in hiring in order to overcome the “racist” prejudice of the Big Blog types in “majority minority” America. The logic of these racist against white people racist white boys defies logic. Bobby Kennedy saw the white poor of Appalachia but Sirota only sees “racists” with “white privilege”. And then the Sirota’s and the other white Big Blog Boys sit back and ponder why white people won’t vote for them.
Senator Jim Webb recently wrote about affirmative action programs historically and in the contemporary world.
“Forty years ago, as the United States experienced the civil rights movement, the supposed monolith of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant dominance served as the whipping post for almost every debate about power and status in America. After a full generation of such debate, WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers. The time has come to cease the false arguments and allow every American the benefit of a fair chance at the future.[snip]
In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.
Lyndon Johnson’s initial program for affirmative action was based on the 13th Amendment and on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which authorized the federal government to take actions in order to eliminate “the badges of slavery.” Affirmative action was designed to recognize the uniquely difficult journey of African-Americans. This policy was justifiable and understandable, even to those who came from white cultural groups that had also suffered in socio-economic terms from the Civil War and its aftermath.
Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs. The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.
Contrary to assumptions in the law, white America is hardly a monolith. And the journey of white American cultures is so diverse (yes) that one strains to find the logic that could lump them together for the purpose of public policy.”
It’s Breathing While White.
“Policy makers ignored such disparities within America’s white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.”
The response from Obama Dimocrats to any argument on race is “code”. As Sanneh writes,
“The problem with a fixation on “code words” is that you can start to see them everywhere. At one point, Roediger analyzes the politics of America in the nineteen-seventies through the prism of “such racial ‘code words’ as crime, busing, welfare, and taxes.” Taxes! Is there any hotly debated political topic that couldn’t be considered, in some context, a code word? [snip]
And is there any way for a white politician to criticize a black President in front of a disproportionately white audience and be certain that he or she isn’t, however inadvertently, appealing to a sense of racial solidarity?“
James Taranto, in the Wall Street Journal perhaps has the answer to the anti-white hatred of the Big Blog/Big Media white boys. Taranto writing about the Mosque of Doom employs a word which is applicable to the “honky” Big Blog Boys hatred
“What is the nature of this contempt? In part it is the snobbery of the cognitive elite, exemplified by a recent New York Times Web column by Timothy Egan called “Building a Nation of Know-Nothings”–or by the viciousness directed at Sarah Palin, whose folksy demeanor and state-college background seem terribly déclassé not just to liberals but to a good number of conservatives in places like New York City.
In more cerebral moments, the elitists of the left invoke a kind of Marxism Lite to explain away opinions and values that run counter to their own. Thus Barack Obama’s notorious remark to the effect that economic deprivation embitters the proles, so that they cling to guns and religion. [snip]
The liberal elites cannot comprehend common sense, and, incredibly, they think that’s a virtue. After all, common sense is so common.
The British philosopher Roger Scruton has coined a term to describe this attitude: oikophobia. Xenophobia is fear of the alien; oikophobia is fear of the familiar: “the disposition, in any conflict, to side with ‘them’ against ‘us’, and the felt need to denigrate the customs, culture and institutions that are identifiably ‘ours.'”
The Oikophobe, or “Oik” is a familiar character to Hillary Supporters and Sarah Palin supporters:
“The oik is, in his own eyes, a defender of enlightened universalism against local chauvinism.”
Sirota, Bowers, the DailyKooks, the Head Kook, the “creative class” are Oiks.
“Yet the oiks’ vision of themselves as an intellectual aristocracy violates the first American principle ever articulated: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . .”
This cannot be reconciled with the elitist notion that most men are economically insecure bitter clinging intolerant bigots who need to be governed by an educated elite. Marxism Lite is not only false; it is, according to the American creed, self-evidently false. That is why the liberal elite finds Americans revolting.”
Americans are revolting but not in the Sirota, Bowers, “creative class”, DailyKooks, understanding of the term. Americans are revolting and in November the “creative class” of Kooks is going to witness an all out electoral REVOLT. It can’t come soon enough.