Different Day, Same Shit.

If you're a minority and you're suffering from racial inequality, Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal thinks it's all your fault:

We have made tremendous progress, but as long as our society is comprised of imperfect human beings, we will always be striving for a more perfect union. We must not let this constant process prevent us from acknowledging the enormous strides we have already made.

Yet we still place far too much emphasis on our “separateness,” our heritage, ethnic background, skin color, etc. We live in the age of hyphenated Americans: Asian-Americans, Italian-Americans, African-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans, Indian-Americans, and Native Americans, to name just a few.

Here’s an idea: How about just “Americans?” That has a nice ring to it, if you ask me. Placing undue emphasis on our “separateness” is a step backward. Bring back the melting pot.

There is nothing wrong with people being proud of their different heritages. We have a long tradition of folks from all different backgrounds incorporating their traditions into the American experience, but we must resist the politically correct trend of changing the melting pot into a salad bowl. E pluribus Unum.

For the longest, black Americans really, REALLY wanted to be just plain ol' "Americans." Too bad about the constant, unending and institutionalized push via a variety of social, political and economic forces to keep those African-Americans and others hyphenated not just in name, but also in how they interact with so-called "plain ol' Americans."

For the record, Asian-Americans, Italian-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans and Indian-Americans can all integrate themselves into the plain ol' American collective by adopting varying degrees of Whiteness™. That's something that hasn't quite been afforded to African-Americans. Or Native-Americans, for that matter.

As Aviva Shen sums things up over at Think Progress:

If he had done even cursory research before writing his editorial, Jindal may have discovered some systemic inequities preventing minorities from assimilating to his satisfaction. Though Jindal is right that Americans have made “significant progress” since the March On Washington For Jobs And Freedom, the national black unemployment rate has steadily remained double the white unemployment rate for the past 60 years.

In urban areas like Chicago, the poverty rate and median income for black families is also about the same as it was in 1963.

Even segregation, once vanquished by the civil rights movement, is rebounding aggressively. Since 2001, urban schools and neighborhoods have become increasingly re-segregated through lax integration enforcement and so-called “white flight.” Research shows this resegregation intensifies poverty and violence in minority neighborhoods, trapping black families in an endless cycle. Jindal himself has helped this trend along in New Orleans with his school privatization plan, which has worsened racial inequality in 34 historically segregated public schools and, according to the Justice Department, “reversed much of the progress made toward integration.”

Instead of digging deep into the historical, social and institutional flaws that have served to cockblock genuine equality and progress, Piyush makes a standard-issue plea for "togetherness" and through his criticism of those who dare hold on to their own cultural identities, subtly blames minorities for not working hard enough to genuinely be a part of America.

A platitude of this magnitude just goes to show how much our friend Piyush is out-of-touch with the realities of being in the "minority" column in the U.S. I know he has to keep those conservative bonafides burnished, as he's done by taking pot-shots at Eric Holder over school vouchers, but come on - you'd figure that someone who had to change his name to meet the minimum standards of acceptability among the unreconstructed should know better.

Then again, I should know better, especially with guys like Allen West around.

Meanwhile, the state of Louisiana leads the world in incarceration. He may want to take a good look at that, too.

The above is what happens when you dedicate a song to Trayvon Martin and someone who doesn't like it decides to do something about it. Given his age and place of birth, I'm sure Lester Chambers has seen his fair share of stupidity in his life. I wonder if he ever suspected it would meet up with him up close and personal on this day:

Chambers, 73, was performing at the Hayward Russell City Blues Festival in Hayward, California, when a 43-year-old woman, identified by police as Dinalynn Andrews Potter, jumped onstage and knocked Chambers down. Chambers' wife, Lola, told the Mercury News that the singer had just dedicated Curtis Mayfield and the Impressions' "People Get Ready" to Martin, saying that if Mayfield were alive today, he'd change the lyrics from "there's a train a comin'" to "there's a change a comin'."

Andrews Potter was wrestled to the ground and subdued by stage hands, and Chambers was wheeled away to an ambulance. As the video shows, he was still in good spirits, even flashing a peace sign. Chambers was treated at the hospital and released. A photo posted to Facebook by his son, Dylan, shows Chambers' injuries: a "bruised rib muscle and nerve damage and he is sore all over," wrote Dylan.

Andrews Potter, meanwhile, was arrested on suspicion of battery, cited and released. According to Billboard, Chambers' family is pushing authorities to file hate crime charges.

Fuse spoke with Chambers following the incident. "I was asking for peace," he explains. "She got in my face and called me all kinds of MFs, saying that I started all this."

After the attack Chambers was "totally out of it," he says. "I've never been so shocked and traumatized."

Dinalynn Andrews Potter had absolutely no right to assault Mr. Chambers, but nevertheless felt it was within her privilege to. Of course, if Mr. Chambers had been 40 years younger and built like a stack of bricks, she would have been too cowed to even contemplate an attack. If she had a husband or boyfriend with her, she would have sent him up there in her stead. If Mr. Chambers was white just like herself, would she had bothered to approach the stage at all?

When people claim that there was no racial component worth mentioning in the George Zimmerman case, when people want to pretend to be colorblind and skip over the racially-motivated rationale that caused Zimmerman to exit his vehicle and roust a young man minding his own business, when those same people claim that Trayvon was responsible for his own death, give Zimmerman a pass and plenty of sympathy for killing somone and then become furious when you call them out on their pretend colorblindness, tone-deafness and self-serving attitudes...I point to the above video and other incidents like it.

When people are scared shitless over the black community "starting a riot" over the injustice that unfolded in that Sanford, Florida courtroom, yet happily gloss over and dismiss racially-motivated actions like the above, it reveals the staggering amount of hypocrisy involved. Of course, when the black community is rightfully outraged, mainstream America responds with cries over "black on black" crime and how the community can't seem to get a handle on it, as though it is supposed to make the community fall silent and contemplate its own so-called hypocrisy.

This is why we're pissed. This is why we get upset whenever there are attempts to have our voices silenced.

There are calls to see Potter charged with a hate crime. I hope the authorities do just that. These things simply cannot stand without some serious repercussions being formed in response.

Again, this woman felt it was within her privilege to clamber on stage and assault a 73-year-old man because he, in her own words, "started this." She saw someone who she figured couldn't fight back. Oddly enough, George Zimmerman saw the same in Trayvon Martin.

And so it was for a few weeks until the race-baiting industry saw an opportunity to further the racist careers of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the Black Panthers. President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, et al, who then swept down on the Florida community refusing to admit that the 17-year-old dope smoking, racist gangsta wannabe Trayvon Martin was at all responsible for his bad decisions and standard modus operendi of always taking the violent route.

With an obvious racist chip on his shoulder, referencing the neighborhood watch guy as a “creepy ass cracker” to his fellow racist female friend who admitted under oath that that is how non-blacks are referred to normally in their circles, Trayvon had no reason not to attack, because it was the standard thug thing to do. See Chicago any day of the week.

You know, Ted, there's a reason you're a washed-up rocker whose only claim to fame was a one-hit wonder. I bet if someone called you a washed-up, meth smoking, cowardly racist rocker wannabe, you'd get hold of a lawyer ASAP.

Too bad Trayvon can't hire a lawyer to protect himself from all sorts of slander and defamation. Your friend George did a wonderful job of making that happen.

The jury got it right, and non-racist America rejoices that there is still common sense, honesty and decency aware of identifying justice in this country. America also believes that the entire prosecutorial team should be ashamed of themselves and disbarred for ignoring the obvious and kowtowing to the pure racism that forced the politically correct lie that only black lives killed by non-blacks matter, which is why there are no headlines, no protests, no prosecutions and no Barak Obama or Eric Holder meddling in the nonstop black-on-black slaughter in their gun-free zone of Chicago.

Too bad the president and the attorney general are too busy dealing with far more important matters to address your libel. You should thank your lucky stars the president doesn't have a J. Edgar Hoover-type around who could, say, out you as a closeted homosexual or one of those dreaded socialists you conservative types hate so much.

Martin Luther King Jr. is rolling over in his grave that he sacrificed his life for the cause of judging people by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin, as so many of his own race carry in in self-destructive behavior while professional race mongers blame everything on racism. It is painful and heartbreaking to say and write this, but horrifically it is true. Blacks kill more blacks in a weekend in Chicago than the evil, vile Ku Klux Klan idiots did in 50 years. Truly earth shattering insane. And not a peep from Obama or Holder. Tragic.

Too bad Martin Luther King Jr. can't respond to you speaking for him or taking his words out of context. Invoking the man's words and image does not give you card blanche against attacking a victim of injustice. Or for suggesting that blacks are a greater evil among themselves than the Ku Klux Klan ever was.

The only racism on that night was perpetrated by Trayvon Martin, and everybody knows it.

Trayvon Martin's only misfortune was existing that fateful night. Perhaps George Zimmerman should had stayed in the damn car like he was instructed to. Then, none of this would have happened.

And you, Mr. Nugent, should figure out how to regain your media relevancy without leaning on your right-wing crutches for support.

Not shown: the termination notice Mitt Romney gave him during the morning meeting.

Like most Americans and possibly others around the world, I grew up with Sesame Street. Big Bird, Ernie and Bert, Cookie Monster, Oscar the Grouch and that weird Snuffleupagus thing. As a young kid, Sesame Street was just one of the many programs I watched on a regular basis on PBS. My mother figured planting me in front of a TV tuned to PBS was a slightly better alternative to just planting me in front of a TV, period. Given her druthers, she would have rather had my nose buried in a book.

So seeing Mitt Romney, a man who's already expressed a willingness to dispose of employees as easily as one tosses a used tissue, proclaim a love for the big yellow tuft of feathers in one breath and crap in the bird's nest in the next irked me a bit. I like Big Big and I sure wouldn't say the following to a guy who hosts one of the premier news and debate shows on PBS:

I’m sorry, Jim. I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I’m going to stop other things. I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like you too. But I’m not going to -- I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it. That’s number one.

Mitt's little golden moment shouldn't surprise anyone. No, I haven't wrapped my head around how PBS became a line item that requires a Chinese title loan to keep afloat, either.

If Fred McFeely Rogers was still alive, he'd probably have some choice words for our friend Mitt. Then again, perhaps Mitt would try to bully Mr. Rogers around before the shame subroutine on his neuronet processor kicked in. Fortunately, we have Neil deGrasse Tyson around to send a few of those choice words his way:

Cutting PBS support (0.012% of budget) to help balance the Federal budget is like deleting text files to make room on your 500Gig hard drive
— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) October 4, 2012

For the record, 60 percent of PBS funding comes from private donors and grants, which explains the yearly PBS donation drives. In 2010, federal funding accounted for a mere 12 percent of revenue. For 2015, Congress plans to set aside approximately $445 million for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the entity that handles the funding for PBS and NPR. In the grand scheme of Congressional budgets that include ludicrous things like corn subsidies and multi-billion dollar military equipment, the money allotted for CPB is the literal equivalent of the grocery store coupon you clipped out of the newspaper. It's not even worth the penny you just vacuumed up by accident that time.

And yet, it wound up being an expenditure that has to be stopped.

I doubt Mitt would do something as stupid as "kill Big Bird." His words, like so many others, are red meat for an audience who gets off on the thrill of ideological gore. They already see PBS as an indoctrination tool wielded by liberals to teach kids subversive social skills like sharing, empathy and tolerance. The arts, public programming, most forms of education and programs that benefit the poor are looked at with an evil eye by conservatives. I'm sure corporate execs don't have much love for PBS or Big Bird, either. After all, it would be a major coup for corporations if they could somehow can the "no commercials during the show" format in favor of...what you already see on decidedly non-public television.

Make no mistake, this isn't about cutting waste. It's all about indulging in a unique type of "tough love" fantasy that involves conservative father figures whipping America's soft behind with a wire hanger. It's a fantasy continuously cultivated by Republicans who don't mind coasting on a wave of bootstraps-induced cheerleading from their die-hard constituents, many who believe they shouldn't be indulging in "any of that faggot hippie shit." These are the very people who will not only kneecap the futures of their own children just to run a "liberal pussy," "red diaper doper baby" or a "Muslim Socialist Kenyan Marxist nig*CLANG*" out of office, they also believe that the guy they vote into office genuinely gives a fuck about them, even as their state whittles down their Medicaid coverage to a bottle of aspirin, a semi-sterile lance and a few bandages.

To think that Mitt Romney genuinely cares about your situation is like a drug addict believing his dealer genuinely has his best interests at heart.

This is the approach we have to take to get America to a balanced budget. The president said he’d cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it. Trillion-dollar deficits for the last four years. The president’s put it in place as much public debt -- almost as much debt held by by the public as all prior presidents combined.

The above conveniently forgets the continuing debt created by engaging in two major military operations overseas, tax breaks largely benefiting a sub-section of Americans and foreign nationals whose wealth remains out of national circulation and a devastating economic downturn that's resulted in high unemployment rates and dim prospects for today's job-seeker, the very same people who are being told to pull up their bootstraps, suck down those cheap tins of cat food and get back to finding a job during a jobless recovery.

$15 trillon dollars seems like a big amount to someone who's looking at, say, $15,000 of credit card debt. The difference between the U.S. debt and your debt is that 1)the U.S. has the ability to print as much of its own scrip as it wants to pay down that debt and 2)you don't. And if you did, you'd be up for federal charges right about now. Unlike Greece, the U.S. has the ability to momentarily print its way out of debt if it wanted. For obvious reasons, it's not a very good idea, but the option is there. So is taxation and the elimination of loopholes, wasteful subsidies and pork spending, but we all know how popular those options are with most folks.

Balancing the budget on the backs of Big Bird and Elmo won't do shit except give die-hard FReeper-types a penile salute at half-mast and GOP candidates something to point out to their constituents as they make their reelection runs. Cutting and slashing puny programs like public broadcasting might satisfy those who just can't wait for the ideological coat hanger to thwack America's hind parts, but it won't do anything to solve the problems plaguing this country.

Please note the following video. It's a clip of Mitt Romney in an interview with Scott Pelley on CBS' 60 Minutes:


To start, the Emergency Room was never meant to be a primary means of care, hence its name "Emergency Room." Nevertheless, millions of Americans who do not have access to health insurance due to financial status or preexisting conditions are forced to use the ER when crisis strikes, instead of heading off that crisis with preventative care.

In short, people shouldn't have to ignore easily treatable ailments until said ailments land them in the ER because they can't afford preventative care. Also note how Romney manages to hand-wave his own universal healthcare solution. He won't burden Texas or other like-minded states with the burden of having to take care of their own citizens for a change. Reassuring, that.

If this (or any of the long strings of gaffes, shambles and other WTF moments) doesn't prove how out of touch the Mittster is with the rest of the U.S., perhaps this notable story will:

Romney’s wife, Ann, was in attendance, and the candidate spoke of the concern he had for her when her plane had to make an emergency landing Friday en route to Santa Monica because of an electrical malfunction. “I appreciate the fact that she is on the ground, safe and sound. And I don’t think she knows just how worried some of us were,” Romney said. “When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly, there’s no — and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem. So it’s very dangerous. And she was choking and rubbing her eyes. Fortunately, there was enough oxygen for the pilot and copilot to make a safe landing in Denver. But she’s safe and sound.”

Omit the highlighted portion of that and you get a guy who's just talking off-hand about how concerned he was about his wife's safety. Too bad he didn't. You have to wonder how many times he's been on a Gulfstream staring listlessly out a cabin window wondering why the darn things don't at least slide open like the ones on the tour bus. I can point and laugh at this stuff all day, but I don't have all day. There's plenty of work to be done between now and November 5. Now excuse me while I talk to Lupe Fiasco* about why sitting out this election would be, pardon the pun, a fiasco for him, his fans and this country.

Let me heal from the wounds of 400 years of institutionalized agony and destruction first...then maybe I'll think about voting...
— Lupe Fiasco (@LupeFiasco) September 20, 2012

I feel you, but you're going about the wrong way doing it.

*Do a Google search and you'll see dozens of stories on Lupe Fiasco's voting stance. What caught my eye was Twitchy's headline for their story: "Lupe Fiasco: I won’t vote until ‘I heal from the wounds of 400 years of institutionalized agony’". Notice that no other news outlet went with this headline. Subtle, real subtle, Twitchy - I see what you're trying to do and how. Come to think of it, this was the same type of shit Breitbart was a pro at doing before his untimely demise. Yet another reason to stay on your A-game when it comes to unadulterated bullshit.

"One of the things that I would do is take all black people back to the South and put them on the plantation so they would understand the ethic of working. I'm going to put them all on the plantation. They need a good hard education on what it is to work."

I think Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson's gonna have a hard time convincing even his fellow House Negros that voluntarily giving one's self up to the "peculiar institution" as a way of building character is a good idea. I guess he never did watch Roots or better still, "Slavery by Another Name."

"Newt (Gingrich) said that he would have black children, minority children work as janitors at school. Working as a janitor would build character, more so than the handouts so many of them like."

"I know some people take it personally because a whole lot of folks don't like hearing the truth; they like to be in denial," he added. "Not all black people, but most black people know, and white people know, and black people say it more in private than they would in public, but for the last 50 years or so, generations and generations of black people have relied on the government or someone else to take care of them."

"Many black women have had babies out of wedlock and passed that on to their daughters that if they have babies out of wedlock, they'll get food stamps, free houses and your rent paid," Peterson said.

There are many ways to instill character and good work ethics in young kids, and making them work a mop and broom at school isn't exactly one of those ways to go about it.* You're not gonna instill a good work ethic in someone by forcing them to reenact the life and times of an ordinary black slave in 1840s Alabama. Resentment and a desire to kill whoever thought this was a good idea, oh yes. Very much so. Also note the stereotypical garbage Peterson spouts at the end. Reads just like an ordinary GOP script.

As I read the above, I began to think about Elizabeth Wright, a woman who shared many of the same traits Peterson's exhibiting, one glaring trait being the compulsion to chastise, upbraid and castigate other blacks within the presence of and for the approval of white America. It's one thing to speak about the problems plaguing the black community; it's another to speak on those problems just to get brownie points from your fellow white conservative friends, many who'd die laughing at the spectacle of one "nigger" whipping another.

...if they have babies out of wedlock, they'll get food stamps, free houses and your rent paid...

Why do conservatives tell themselves this? Being in poverty is not a picnic where you're suddenly showered with all sorts of freebies and an opportunity to live in a life of leisure that even the wealthy 0.1% would envy. Everything comes with a string attached: the food stamps are set at a paltry amount with restrictions on what you can and can't buy, the "free" house is in a shitty neighborhood and requires mandatory community service and surprise "inspections," and that "free" rent suddenly evaporates if you manage to make one cent over the state/federal poverty line. You're given enough to keep you in poverty but not enough to overcome it, in most cases. Poverty isn't luxurious -- it's stressful as hell. But try telling the average conservative making a comfortable $55k to $250k that.

Speaking of conservatives:

According to the report, Peterson himself grew up on an Alabama plantation where his family had once been enslaved, and where members of his family had later worked as share croppers.

It's all coming to focus. I have to wonder if Peterson's ancestors were overseers or trusties back then.

Perhaps the good Rev. should be a bit more honest with us and tell us what he really wants: to forfeit his own right to be considered and treated as a full-fledged human being and be returned to sub-human status, whence he'll be worked from sunup to sundown with the callousness and lack of dignity given to even most common livestock and whipped for his troubles if he reconsiders or steps out of line. He'll be lesser than livestock, but at least he'll be exactly where he wants to be.

*Most Japanese schools have their students pitch in with tidying up the classroom after instruction. As far as I know, the task is largely voluntary, although the collective spirit precludes all but a few from deliberately opting out. But this isn't Japan. 

In this blog post, we have a 45-year-old rapper whose career was built on heaping piles of misogyny, the "Pimp" allure, flagrant disrespect and objectification of women and overall coonery giving "fatherly" tips on how to "turn girls out." As Phlip over at the Intersection of Madness and Reality explained, fathers everywhere should be lined up for several blocks for an opportunity to beat this man senseless.

“When you get to late middle school, early high school and you start feeling a certain way about the girls… I’m gonna tell you a couple tricks. A lot of the boys are going to be running around trying to get kisses from the girls… We’re going way past that. I’m taking you to the hole.”

“You push her up against the wall, you take your finger and put a little spit on it and you stick your finger in her underwear and you rub it on there and watch what happens.”

Sadly, beyond black-oriented news sites and blogs, I haven't heard much about Too Short's predatory pontificating. Perhaps if he made the same mistake as Jamie Foxx and directed his "advice" towards the ever-so-impressionable white teenagers, there would be a bit more exposure. In fact, the outrage generated by this would probably make Michael Vick's dogfighting conviction seem like a quaint shoplifting incident at Target.

But when it comes to bullshit that happens within the black community, events like these don't even rate an eyebrow raise. Black men in general who predate on black women and girls don't rate a mention unless the target happens to be extremely famous or white. It's how Anthony Sowell managed to get away with his crimes for so long and why Rihanna's abuse at the hands of Chris Brown became as noteworthy as it did.

I know there was a time where I had thicker skin for this kind of talk; usually ending it with “meh, it’s just music,” but something about the situation in which the person posting this from the position of a now-former rapper (pending earlier explanation, naturally) at age 45 and presumably a father, one would hope that one just wouldn’t take it this far, especially not providing specific rape instructions. I guess achievement of the ripe old age of 32 and the presence of a 7-month-old all too willing to show me her two teeth changed that.

Just like the words spewed by Troi Torain (also known as "DJ Starr") against the daughter and wife of then-rival DJ Envy, most people who are up and up on rap and R&B are quick to dismiss those words as just that: words. Unfortunately, those words can often take a life of their own, reinforcing a negative lifestyle and negative trends that go a long way to hurt the most vulnerable within the black community. It's bad enough that the media and rap culture both go out of its way to devalue black women and reduce them to nothing more than mere sexual objects, but when the famous black men actively advocate said commodification and other black Americans see it as being no big deal...you have to wonder if there's a disconnect somewhere:

Just as it's incredibly offensive and wrong for Star to bring a 4-year-old girl into an ugly radio debate, it seems wrong for Envy to be taking the fight to the same level by calling the police in on the case, when it's really quite clear that Star was just being an asshole in public.

People tend to just shrug and not take these things seriously until 1)it personally affects them or 2)it happens to someone who "matters" and in turn generates publicity that's too big to ignore or shrug off. To get a better idea of what was said:

“I will come for your kids” and I want to “do an R. Kelly (i.e. urinate during sexual intercourse)…on your seed (i.e. child)”. Torain also offered $500 to any listener who could provide information about the rival DJ’s daughter’s school and used racial slurs when talking about the DJ’s wife. Torain went on to say that he wanted to “put mayonnaise in the ass cheeks” of the rival DJ’s young daughter, immediately adding that he also desired to take a bite out of it.

The shit is downright pedophilic. It's no wonder DJ Envy brought the police in on this. Despite his involvement in the beef between him and Torain, this stepped over the line.

It took constant hammering against the walls of tone deaf mass media to momentarily knock Torain off his "hustle." His antics didn't reverberate throughout the media like those of Chris Brown or Jamie Foxx. When your bullshit is aimed at ordinary black women and girls - people whom, in the eyes of the media, don't matter all that much, it's easy to get away with it. Although Too Short and the people at XXL have been called out for it, I doubt it's knocking anyone from those camps off of their hustle. No wonder folks like Gina McCauley are greatly concerned:

"The black community has a problem with how it treats its girls and boys as it relates to violence," McCauley concluded, and she called on black men to take Too Short to task for his comments and re-educate him about respecting black women.

Too many black men are willing to just stand back and not call guys like Too Short out on hurting black women and girls. Too many people want to remain in such a person's good graces rather than risk being ostracized for standing up. The longer these black men sit in silence, the more black women and girls get hurt.

He probably has daughters by multiple women. This is what happens...he tells his daughters to keep her legs closed; he tells his sons to "Be a pimp player"; he has a rotation of women for his children to see. Straight up mixed signals.

That's true for just about every ethnic group and culture. Men and boys are encouraged to predate and fornicate to their hearts' content (except in very specific circumstances), while the onus of sexual protection from said predation falls squarely on women and girls. The menfolk get little blue pills while the womenfolk get little white pills...to hold between their knees.

I hereby re-submit Todd Anthony Shaw's name to the Field Negro for consideration for House Negro of the Day.* I'm sure DMX will be glad to get some of that heat up off him. I'd submit Chris Brown's name, but he doesn't need the publicity or another award.**

*I've just been informed he already made House Negro once.
**He's probably been in the House himself.

Everyone's well aware of how, for decades, Republican leaders have attempted to cast black Americans as lazy, shiftless and entitled creatures and disparaged government assistance programs such as welfare and food stamps by painting a color-aroused portrait of flagrant and wanton abuse of one by the other -- the imaginary black single-mother Cadillac-driving welfare queen who regularly dines on filet mignon and champagne, courtesy of hardworking white American taxpayers, for example. And everyone's aware of how these stereotypes are just one of the many used in the hilariously disturbing dog fight that was the South Carolina primary, namely to draw out and win over the unreconstructed and easily color-aroused.

So you have the mistaken belief that blacks make up the majority of food stamp and welfare recipients, carefully crafted and refined by the GOP, expounded on by the likes of Newt Gingrich and consumed happily by color-aroused and embittered conservatives. You have Lawrence O'Donnell and Jane Walsh, who've called out Newton Leroy on this issue, and then you have Dana Loesch, who confuses the shit out of everyone in a crafty, yet flawed attempt to headgame everyone involved.

Let's start off with Newt Gingrich's comment about food stamps:

You want to be a country that creates food stamps, in which case frankly Obama’s is an enormous success. The most successful food stamp president in American history. Or do you want to be a country that creates paychecks?

On one hand, here's Newton Leroy blowing a dog whistle into the ears of the unreconstructed, who already believe that Pres. Obama, as a black figure and a Democrat, can't help but make it rain food stamps in the White House (which he had painted a gaudy black, purple and gold, just like in the clubs he and Michelle jump off at). On the other hand, people can simply point out that he was just talking about lazy Americans of all creeds and colors. In essence, this quote is so well-crafted that if anyone attempts to call out Gingrich on blowing the dog whistle here, there's plenty of room for false-flag conservatives to maneuver into position and attempt to call out the person calling Gingrich out on their own supposed racism.

Now someone had to call him out on that statement. Here's Joan Walsh doing just that:

Newt Gingrich doubled down on his clever new slur against President Obama as “the food stamp president.” He tried the line in a Friday speech to the Georgia Republican convention, and he used it again on “Meet the Press Sunday.” It’s a short hop from Gingrich’s slur to Ronald Reagan’s attacks on “strapping young bucks” buying “T-bone steaks” with food stamps. Blaming our first black president for the sharp rise in food-stamp reliance (which resulted from the economic crash that happened on the watch of our most recent white president) is just the latest version of Rush Limbaugh suggesting that Obama’s social policy amounts to “reparations” for black people.

Republicans have done well with their quest to stigmatize social welfare programs as handouts to the undeserving, and to pretend that most of the undeserving are black people.

Indeed they have. The response from Dana Loesch?

Walsh deduced that Gingrich couldn’t possibly be referencing any of this, no, it had to be because he’s being racist.

And what exactly is this "this" she's referring to?

Unemployment is soaring at nine percent.
The CBO predicted that the US economy will be unsustainable by 2037 on its current path.
The IMF declared two weeks ago that the age of America will end in a decade.
One in six Americans now receive government help. USA Today says more Americans are receiving federal aid than ever. Investors’ Insight says more Americans than ever before are on the government dole.
Lastly, according to our own government statistics, more white Americans receive federal aid than black Americans, shattering the stereotype that led Walsh to immediately think “black people” when she heard the words “food stamps.”

Problem is, if you ask anyone walking down the street what they would immediately think when they hear "food stamps," it would be a mental picture of a plump black woman with Kool-Aid hair, weave and fingernail extensions and a bad attitude giving the cashier lip while swiping her EBT card at the card reader.

The above images are NOT what most people think when they hear about "food stamps." They have no idea that more white Americans are on the dole than black Americans. Many a black blogger knows this -- to stave off attacks by the color-aroused, they had to look up this information for themselves. Politicians and mainstream media outlets, for one reason or another, have not made that knowledge widespread to America in general.

Loesch, on the other hand, says it's not about the dog whistles, because as far as she and other conservatives are concerned, there are none. Instead, you're a "racist" for even assuming that Gingrich could have insinuated that he was making a sly swipe against black people, you racist liberal progressive Democrat scum, you.

Loesch isn't above dishing out backhanded complements. In fact, she pats Lawrence O'Donnell on the back for stating the obvious:

It’s good to see a progressive finally stop believing that food stamps are patented to black Americans. If only Walsh and The Nation thought the same. Perhaps Lawrence O’Donnell has been reading Big Journalism. It’s OK, Lawrence, we won’t tell!

So, Loesch accuses O'Donnell, Walsh and others of being "presumptuous" about the GOP linking food stamps to blacks, as though they themselves believed in the stereotype that the GOP has spent decades crafting and refining. Marvelous. She's calling out people who are calling out Gingrich for being a racist prick...for being racist pricks. That is some rather slick shit there.

If most people aren't careful, they'll read what she's written and start nodding their heads in agreement, because it seems like something that's sensible -- just a bunch of liberals who are making something out of nothing, right. It takes a while to see through the bullshit.

By the way:

The Regressives have to say everything is a 'dog whistle'... how else could they continue to peddle the absurd notion that they care or are even remotely competent.

Democrats are the party of ... Jim Crow, the KKK, destruction of the black family, death of millions of unborn, class envy, hatred of their countrymen and country.

It always starts with a bit of truth. After Reconstruction, the Democrat party was the home of self-proclaimed "Dixiecrats" who indulged in the worst excesses of Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan and segregationist policies. By the 1960s, the Democrat party was slowly becoming less about Jim Crow and more about the liberal policies that we all know and love (well, most of us do).

And then came the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Southern Strategy, created in large part by Nixon's political strategist Kevin Phillips.

By the 1980s, the Democrat party was no longer what it used to represent and neither was the GOP. The conservative party threw its doors open to every unreconstructed bigot and Dixiecrat who loathed the day Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, along with their constituents. It's no accident that the southeast is about as blue as a Air Force serviceman's dress uniform red as the back of a stereotypical Southerner's neck.

Black Americans knew that the chessboard was being flipped around, and they switched sides accordingly. And it still burns the GOP's collective ass that blacks weren't stupid enough to remain at the GOP table as the old Dixiecrats came stomping in. So no, the Democrats are not the party of "Jim Crow, the KKK, destruction of the black family, death of millions of unborn, class envy, hatred of their countrymen and country." But the Republicans have shown that they fit those characteristics to a tee. Projection, wasn't it?

And yes, this Dana Loesch is the same Dana Loesch who claimed she would have copped a squat and a piss on dead terrorists, despite the desecration of enemy bodies being verboten under the Geneva Convention. And her blog is apparently a part of the Breitbart collective. Take that as you will.

As I said in my very first blog post, it's better to have your own stuff, because you never know when you'll end up being shown the door at other venues, especially if you happen to be a contributing blogger whose views suddenly clash with the status quo or offend the site administrator or founder. Those who ran afoul of famous firebagger Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake learned that the hard way. Fellow blogger Redeye parted ways with Left in Alabama after a number of disagreements among former fellow bloggers there.

Which brings me to this bit of fallout from the epic Greenwaldian clusterfuck that has most of the blogosphere in stitches:

In case you’re not up to speed, long story short, I had a Twitter discussion with Marcy Wheeler about the NDAA; a Greenwald supporter quipped that if I saw Obama raping a nun on live TV, I would defend him for it; another supporter quipped that I would fantasize about playing the role of the raped nun; and Greenwald piled on. When asked to account for the clumsy rape metaphor, Greenwald doubled down, claiming that it wasn’t a metaphor, and that he actually believed that I and other Obama supporters would defend Obama if we were to see him raping a nun.

In what world is such a comment appropriate? It was a vile thing to say, and it is a vile thing to defend. Moreover, the stalwartness and cluelessness with which people, including John Cole, defended that statement is disappointing.

To be clear: I neither asked nor expected John to defend me. I can and do defend myself. But I was surprised and stunned that he stridently defended Greenwald when he could have, and should have, said nothing. Even worse, he managed to cast Greenwald as a victim. Stunning.

Both Greenwald’s comments and the comments offered in defense are incontrovertibly offensive to women, offensive to rape survivors, and are inexcusable. Does that mean I think Greenwald is pro-rape? Of course not. But using rape as a metaphor or leveraging it to score political points is tone-deaf, at best, and malicious at worst.

The above is from contributor "Angry Black Lady," who sadly will be leaving Balloon Juice behind this bullshit. She has her own blog with a stellar cast of contributors, so her departure from the blog won't be a devastating event. But her departure in of itself is rather disturbing, for reasons I'll go into later on.

This isn't the first time she's had a major disagreement with John Cole, recovering conservative and founder of Balloon Juice. Both came to blows when it came to the NDAA. But I was led to believe that it was more or less "no harm, no foul" in the end, just two bloggers voicing fiercely strong opinions on a subject, particularly one with a potential to cause ill will among bloggers and commentators.

This time, the whole affair became patently ridiculous. At the heart of it all was this Chirpstory, in which Twitter user @DrDawg made an unfortunate comment about ABL's supposed willingness to defend Pres. Obama no matter what he did, with Glenn Greenwald effectively co-signing the comment:



These two tweets helped set off a firestorm of indignation and criticism from other users, something that Greenwald quickly proved himself as being incapable of handling further into the storyline. Somewhere in there, John Cole affected a stance that attempted to criticize people for essentially making a bigger deal of this than he thought should have been made:


If you want to make the point that 1)people are wrongly attributing this quip to Greenwald, and 2)lambasting Greenwald for this quip is a waste of energy, this is the wrong way to go about it. The above made Cole look less like an impartial observer wishing to set the record straight and more like someone who attempted to pick the most indirect way of defending Greenwald possible.

Many people didn't see things the way Cole and others saw them, as seen below: (HT to @dvnix)


As a result, the blog split into two camps, one that defended Greenwald and others on the so-called Professional Left while castigating ABL and others for defending Pres. Obama, and others who were genuinely outraged by what seemed to be a free pass given to Greenwald, et al. "Unquestioning Obama defenders" was the overarching meme for those posts, directed at those who disagreed with Greenwald's Chicken Little bullshit and those who attempted to explain Obama's position on NDAA.

Ever since that post on the NDAA and whether or not indefinite detention existed for American citizens (answer: it doesn't), I've always had this feeling that half of the blog's commentator pool wanted to castigate and upbraid the "uppity" ABL for expressing opinions that ran contrary to what they wanted to believe at the time. Perhaps that vibe was always there, but from that point on, it grew into epic proportions. The commentators at Balloon Juice are known for copious amounts of snark, but a growing number of people became prone to getting downright nasty when it came to certain issues.

Between that, the growing lovefest with civil libertarianism and the attendant boy-crush on Next American Hero™ Ron Paul, I figured ABL's departure would come sooner or later. It's hard NOT to interject "race" into this subject, especially given how this country is literally soaked to the bone with racial antagonism, but I couldn't help but get the vibe that some wanted to dress down and/or chase away ABL for not conforming to the views expressed by an obviously superior white Progressive Liberal, whose views were to be automatically respected and questioned. Remember (this goes out to those who don't do reading comprehension well), this isn't a sweeping indictment on the behavior of the people on the blog, just a somewhat disturbing observation of a few commentators.

What disturbs me the most is a growing number of self-proclaimed liberals and progressives cosigning with a man who not only stood with white supremacist figures, but also has a mountain of evidence that outs him as being less than comfortable with minorities, no matter how much he and his supporters claim to have their best interests at heart. It's a bit unnerving to read the newsletters about his pathological fear of blacks and gays, only to be goaded into supporting Ron Paul because his stance on drugs happens to coincide with the welfare of the black community by coincidence. But that's the sort of thing his supporters want to drive home. Blacks and Latinos are supposed to climb aboard the Straight Talk Ron Paul Express, no questions asked, for a few trinkets crafted purely by coincidence.

I suspect there's a deeper game afoot, one that involves using the ever-present levels of poutrage and indignation over Pres. Obama's failures to deliver the ideal presidential experience progressive liberals wanted to kneecap the president's chances at re-election, by driving an deep and permanent wedge between progressive liberals who are for Obama and progressive liberals who are fed up with the guy. Convince the dissatisfied side to not vote (or vote for Ron Paul) as a way to strike back at an "ineffective" Obama, and you'll have the recipe for the GOP slotting in their preferred candidate come Nov. 2012 with relative ease. And having President Romney in office come 2013 doesn't bother many Professional Lefties one bit, as these guys are the least affected economically by conservative policy -- in fact, their bank accounts rely on having conservatives in power for PLs to complete the self-effacing perpetual underdog routine, something that's hard to do when "your guys" are in power. A guy like Greenwald is the perfect trojan horse for knocking lesser minds off balance while sowing the seeds for a Democrat wash, and a conservative victory.

ABL will be fine. There's no doubt about that. But I worry about the increasingly hostile atmosphere back at Balloon Juice and how it will shape future political values and opinions.

The disinformation campaign to cast the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) as the dawn of a new "Nazi America" age continues unabated on Twitter. More and more people are attempting to use the bill as pretext for scaring the living shit out of the Occupy Wall Street people into discouraging support of President Barack Obama, and as an excuse for not casting a vote in his favor. I hate playing "conspiracy theorist" here, but I have to wonder if this isn't just some campaign whipped up by a conservative think tank to harness waves of liberal outrage and indignation to batter Obama's reelection chances - in other words, let the indignation and moral outrage of liberals and the smooth second-guessing of the professional left do the GOP's heavy lifting for them.

Milt Shook has a great article on his blog, the aptly named "Please Cut The Crap," that spells it all out for anyone who still has a hard time grasping the fact that, no, there isn't an "Indefinite Detention Bill" that locks up Americans indefinitely a la gulags and Nazi concentration camps:

Here’s the language in section 1021 that has the pro lefties up in arms. It’s in the Conference Report. Follow along, please. Oddly (?), most pro left cite (1), but leave out (2)-(4). I know, that just seems so odd, doesn’t it?

(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111– 84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

Yes, I do admit section c) looks troubling, especially if you look at it all by itself. But as long as we have Obama (or Biden) in office, we have time to get rid of it, especially if we give them a Democratic Congress. But I would also note that the pro lefties also leave out sections b) d) and e). When you read them you’ll know why.

(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

Oops.

Yes, you read that right. The so-called – the “Indefinite Detention Bill” that pro and emo lefties are trying to convince you will give the president the power to round us all up and detain us forever without a trial, not only doesn’t exist on its own, but the language is somewhat limiting, and specifically excludes US citizens or people who are in the United States legally. Section b) 2) does bother me, but I don’t think it’ll survive a court challenge because it’s too broad. What the hell is a “belligerent act,” for example? I once called a US Senator an asshole to his face; that was kind of belligerent.

I will note, for the record, that the provision does fly in the face of the 14th Amendment, and I don't like it. But I don't see anything in it that isn't reversible, and certainly nothing that's worth putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work for, just as we're recovering from the worst recession in 80 years.

Milt goes on to explain how the desire to trash can the entire bill has its own set of unwanted consequences:

Obama doesn't have a line-item veto, so he can’t veto the “Indefinite Detention Bill” without vetoing the entire NDAA. Now, you may think that would be a good thing, but would it? It’s not just about the troops. What about all of those civilians who might lose their jobs for at least a month or two, while Obama and the teabagging GOP worked out a new NDAA without that little amendment, assuming they could do so? What do you think canceling all those defense contracts for a month or two would do to the unemployment rate? How about six months? What would happen to all of those small towns that depend on the military bases and contractors to support their small businesses? Do you imagine the GOP might be a bit energized after the unemployment rate suddenly rises to 10%?

Those of you who claim “principle” when you discuss this need to stop. Many pros and emos claim Obama’s showing a “lack of principle” by signing this “Indefinite Detention Bill.” Forget the fact that you're claiming a lack of principle when you're lying to the public about a bill that doesn't exist. You’re actually advocating for an action that could put millions of people out of work for a few months, and forcing our troops to lose their meager pay for a few months for… what, exactly? What are your “principles” when you advocate for that, in order to kill an amendment that will probably ultimately have zero effect on anyone, and might even die in the courts?

AND I BLAME THE REPUBLICANS FOR THIS, NOT OBAMA. They put it there, not him. Blaming this on Obama is kind of like blaming the company who put the olives in the jar because you didn't chew your olive responsibly. Just saying.

In order to kill the above provisions, Obama has to kill the entire bill. That would be a politically stupid thing to do, and anyone with any common sense would understand that. The best way to handle this is to keep this provision in mind, give Obama a second term, and give him a Congress that will pass a repeal that he can sign. There you go; problem solved.

Sorry, Milt. Some people who are emotionally charged over the NDAA right now are dead set on not giving President Obama a second term. The funny thing about these folks is if you ask them if or why they think the nation would be better off with an Republican administration, given that such a thing is the alternative at the moment, you'll only get silence. Or a regurgitation of "throw the bum(s) out. That's right - throw the bums out, but let's not give any thought to the new set of bums filling their spots.

Personally speaking, I'm getting sick of these people. They'll risk handing the nation over on a silver platter to Republicans for the next generation over these lies. The Republicans aren't gonna stop them from believing a series of blatant lies and committing a terrible mistake that eventually works in the GOP's favor.

Milt leaves a wonderful parting shot for common-variety chucklefuck and current pied-piper of professional leftist disinformation Glenn Greenwald:

Look, folks, I don’t like this section of the bill much more than Greenwald does. On its face, without lying, it’s odious, especially if Obama is replaced by anyone in the current Republican field. The problem is, the bullshit braying being screeched by professional lefties like Glenn Greenwald actually helps make the possibility of a Republican president and a Republican Senate greater, not less likely. If you really want crap like this amendment repealed, you’ll need a Democratic House and Senate and a Democratic president. You’ll also need a Supreme Court appointed and approved by Democrats, because an entire court full of Scalia/Thomas/Alito clones will happily give a Republican president this power.

I'm beginning to believe the professional lefties relish the advent of a solidly Republican executive, judicial and legislative power structure. When that happens, the professional left will no longer be obligated to do any heavy lifting. Instead, they can spend all of their time mouthing lofty platitudes about what they believe ought to happen without any responsibility for making any of that happen. And when they're called on such tripe, they can always take a cool, soothing dip into their own personal pool of perpetual underdogism and beautiful martyrdom, and point to the GOP as an insurmountable brick wall for any action they commit. And then it's back to the DC/LA/NYC cocktail parties and other venues of preening self-importance.

I believe they'll piss themselves for the chance to usher in President Gingrich. There's a certain domestic abuse meme that comes into play, but I'm not gonna repeat it. You can see it, and somehow, it's terribly fitting.

Seriously, read Mitt Shook's article on the whole thing. It's a damn-near work of art.

See my previous posts on the National Defense Authorization Act by following the "NDAA" article tag.