• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Within six months Twitter will be fully self-driving.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

Republicans don’t want a speaker to lead them; they want a hostage.

The words do not have to be perfect.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

We still have time to mess this up!

Despite his magical powers, I don’t think Trump is thinking this through, to be honest.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

Balloon Juice has never been a refuge for the linguistically delicate.

Black Jesus loves a paper trail.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

Anyone who bans teaching American history has no right to shape America’s future.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Someone Explain This

Someone Explain This

by John Cole|  September 8, 20059:32 am| 169 Comments

This post is in: Politics, General Stupidity

FacebookTweetEmail

I will publicly acknowledge and credit anyone who can explain how this is not the shameless exploitation of a tragedy for immediate and unrelated political gain:

The televised images of poverty-stricken evacuees from Hurricane Katrina are part of a provocative, last-minute effort by a liberal interest group to divert federal Judge John Roberts’ path to confirmation as chief justice.

MoveOn.org Political Action plans to unveil a TV ad on Monday that questions whether Roberts is sensitive enough to civil rights concerns to lead the Supreme Court. The ad suggests that the plight of the mostly African-American evacuees in New Orleans showed that poverty remains a serious problem among minorities, said Ben Brandzel, the group’s advocacy director. In a mix of judicial and racial politics, the ad then suggests that minorities could suffer if the Senate confirms Roberts.

“The connection is obvious,” Brandzel said. “The images after Hurricane Katrina show we still live in a society where significant racial inequities exist. We believe John Roberts’ record on civil rights … is clearly not the direction our country needs to head now.”

Maybe a Kanye West cameo:

“Judge John Roberts doesn’t care about black people.”

Really, this is absurd.

*** Update ***

And another idiot speaks:

U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., asked House Speaker Dennis Hastert not to send federal disaster aid to officials in Louisiana, calling state and local government there incompetent and corrupt.

In a letter to Hastert on Wednesday, Tancredo urged the speaker to create a “bipartisan select committee” of members of Congress to oversee federal disaster spending in Louisiana.

It boggles the mind. Someone ought to throw his stupid ass and his family into the nasty water in New Orleans.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « An Incoherent Position
Next Post: More on the Saddam ‘Confession’ »

Reader Interactions

169Comments

  1. 1.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 9:41 am

    Do you really think Republicans are above politicizing everything under the sun? Aren’t they the ones that ran on 9/11, 9/11, 9/11?

    Have you been critical of the Right for doing thee things?

    If you have, then fine. You have a valid point here. But if you haven’t, you gotta stop this prissy indignant act because it’s baseless and whiney.

    Republicans wrote the rulebook. We’re just playing by their rules.

  2. 2.

    DJAnyReason

    September 8, 2005 at 9:48 am

    You’re right, its classless and over the line.

  3. 3.

    Doctor Gonzo

    September 8, 2005 at 9:50 am

    I have mixed feelings about whether it is horrible to “politicize” tragedies such as this. If you can’t put these things in a political context, when can you?

    A lot of people in this country are completely uninterested in politics. They just don’t care. Well, I think that these events show how dangerous that is. When you vote (or don’t vote) for people at the local, state, and national level, there are real life-or-death consequences. Katrina is a catastrophic example of that, but if anything good can come from such a tragedy, maybe it will encourage people to pay more attention to what is going on.

    But is that “politicizing” the tragedy? Is that exploiting it?

  4. 4.

    bains

    September 8, 2005 at 9:51 am

    Oh goodness…

    one would hope moreon.org moveon.org had a bit more class – but hoping for a bit is expecting alot. I suspect that showing such an ad will lead to contrary results than moveon wants…

  5. 5.

    John Cole

    September 8, 2005 at 9:52 am

    Republicans wrote the rulebook. We’re just playing by their rules.

    Ok. At least we are on the same page now- you know it is baseless BS. You just don’t care.

  6. 6.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 9:54 am

    John,

    I’m saying that it’s disingenuous for Republicans to cry foul when Democrats politicize something when Republicans do it all the time.

    Do you agree?

    (I haven’t yet spoken about the specific issue here.)

  7. 7.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 9:55 am

    I may surprise you. I agree. Inappropriate. And so is this:

    The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel has gotten the story wrong.

    The man-made disaster is the welfare state.

    There were many decent, innocent people trapped in New Orleans when the deluge hit—but they were trapped alongside large numbers of people from two groups: criminals—and wards of the welfare state, people selected, over decades, for their lack of initiative and self-induced helplessness. The welfare wards were a mass of sheep—on whom the incompetent administration of New Orleans unleashed a pack of wolves.

    What Hurricane Katrina exposed was the psychological consequences of the welfare state. What we consider “normal” behavior in an emergency is behavior that is normal for people who have values and take the responsibility to pursue and protect them. People with values respond to a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to overcome the difficulties they face. They don’t sit around and complain that the government hasn’t taken care of them. And they don’t use the chaos of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men.

    The welfare state—and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains and encourages—is the man-made disaster that explains the moral ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one is reporting.

    Got it. Poor people were the problem. Shameful exploitation of a disaster?

  8. 8.

    NYCmoderate

    September 8, 2005 at 10:05 am

    John, you said:

    Ok. At least we are on the same page now- you know it is baseless BS. You just don’t care.

    I think this ad is just as exploitative as President Bush’s campaign ad that showed the bodies from the WTC. It’s the reason I’m as fed up with Democrats as I am Republicans.

    But I’d like to see which of the commentators who said the 9/11 ad was just fine, perfectly acceptable, will now condemn this with no mention of the other.

    But Dr. Gonzo makes a good point, at some level the issues surrounding Katrina have to be put in a political context so that people realize that their votes have consequences, as does not voting. I’m not saying right this second (tho that moment seems to have come and gone) and I’m not saying with this ad, but there are legitimate political issues here, just there were for 9/11. (Tho I’m far from saying that it needs to be mentioned 147 times a day in every speech given by every Republican, if you know what I mean.)

  9. 9.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 10:07 am

    Tho I’m far from saying that it needs to be mentioned 147 times a day in every speech given by every Republican, if you know what I mean.

    9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11

    How dare Democrats ever politicize anything!

  10. 10.

    Mark

    September 8, 2005 at 10:09 am

    Indeed, spending money for TV ads featuring hurricane victims rather than, say, sending the money to the Red Cross instead to actually help said victims.

  11. 11.

    Krista

    September 8, 2005 at 10:13 am

    It is rather tasteless…especially when there are so many other examples from which to draw that would illustrate their point just as well. I’m also very leery of the direction that the Supreme Court is taking…I’m worried that there will be a lot more government interference in peoples’ private lives. However, I think MoveOn is making a mistake here…similar to the mistakes that some people on this blog make: if you yell too loudly and swing too large a stick, your message might get lost, and you’ll have alienated everybody but the fringe groups who already have their minds made up anyway.

  12. 12.

    Tim F

    September 8, 2005 at 10:15 am

    Oh, the humanity. Democrats tried the sensible approach for enough elections now to realize that in today’s world it’s a sure loser.

    Face it, no matter what the Democrats do the Republicans will scream and cry about liberal vitriol anyway. Might as well see how they react to the real deal.

    Not to say that I endorse this behavior. I don’t. It poisons the atmosphere and gets in the way of sensible legislating. If I could have a government where everybody got along I’d take it, but as long as we’re fantasizing I’ll take a pony and a busty coed on top. Sadly none of this is any different from how governments have behaved since before the democratic process was invented.

    I’m with the people who say that if you have this much spare outrage then you might spend some on what the people who govern America are actually doing. Or, you could go on culling the herd. Not my blog. Either way I’ll be gone for a week or so, for business-related reasons. Plus a Steelers game or two :D

  13. 13.

    John Boucher

    September 8, 2005 at 10:18 am

    New Zogby Poll just hit. The Vacationing President’s Approval Number tumbles to 41%. Also shows him losing to every president since Jimmy Carter if an election were held today. On Katrina it looks like the public was not fooled by the massive media blitz put out by the Apologist Fighting Brigade. Bush gets a 36% positive mark for his dereliction of duty regarding Hurricane Katrina.

    Look at it this way, things have gotten so bad for Bush that he has been reduced to scuttling about the South looking for someone to take the blame for his incompetence. And nobody is buying.

    http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1020

  14. 14.

    Geek, Esq.

    September 8, 2005 at 10:19 am

    Disappointing to see liberals sinking to the level of Bush’s base.

  15. 15.

    Krista

    September 8, 2005 at 10:20 am

    It IS kind of sad that politics can be so juvenile, isn’t it? I once sat in the viewer’s gallery for an assembly of the Nova Scotia legislature. (Our provincial governing body). I was absolutely appalled. My tax dollars are paying the salary of a bunch of children who yelled over each other, never let their opponent get a word in edgewise, and got absolutely nothing of value accomplished. I do wish that more people (MoveOn included) could take the high ground and engage in a mature, thoughtful debate. Unfortunately, when anybody tries, their voice is completely lost in amongst the idiocy. So evidently, the only way to get any attention now in politics is to stoop to the lowest common denominator.

  16. 16.

    Blue Neponset

    September 8, 2005 at 10:20 am

    I don’t know if this consequence was intended or not, but after your Just Curious post I now don’t know if you are being serious when you post stuff like this or you posted it “JUST TO PISS YOU GUYS OFF.”

  17. 17.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 10:21 am

    I think we call all stipulate that EVERYTHING gets politicized on BOTH sides. Terry Schiavo, 911, Katrina EVERYTHING gets the partisans into high gear and each side tries to use it for their “sides” advantage. Thats where we are in American politics at the moment. I think a lot of that blame has to go to Geroge Bush (I know Bush bashing again). But Bush, after 911, when we WERE together as a nation, could have built on that bi-partisan moment and taken our country in a very different direction than he did. He showed NO interest in working with Dems. No interest in compromise. His motto, “you’re either with us or against us” referred as much to domestic politics as it did to foreign affairs. Well, since I aint’ with you Mr. President, you have forced me against you. A very sad state of affairs.

    So John for EVERY example you can show of a liberal doing the wrong thing with regards to Katrina I can show you one on the right side of the fense. It is a fruitless exercise. I much rather concentrate on what MY EMPLOYEES, the Federal government workers, have done, or have not done with regards to this disaster. That is my right. That is my obligation. Its not pointing fingers, its determining if OUR government is functioning for our best interest. Having the top THREE officals at FEMA be political hacks with no Disaster experience is NOT in my best interest. That is EXPLOITING government to reward your pals at the expense of all the rest of us. Which is worse?

  18. 18.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 10:24 am

    New Zogby Poll just hit. The Vacationing President’s Approval Number tumbles to 41%.

    His handling of Katrina is even worse in the new CBS poll. Only 38% approve of his handling the disaster. 58% disapprove.

  19. 19.

    DecidedFenceSitter

    September 8, 2005 at 10:27 am

    Geek, Esq. Says:

    Disappointing to see liberals sinking to the level of Bush’s base.

    Yes it is, but there’s only so many times you can get blindsided, kicked in the groin, and then beaten with baseball bats while lying on the ground before you decide that it may be better to return the favor.

  20. 20.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 10:29 am

    Disappointing to see liberals sinking to the level of Bush’s base.

    Democrats have been bitch slapped for years. It’s time to fight back. But rather than hitting back, i hope they pick up a brick and beat the Republican Party to a bloody pulp.

    The time for politeness and decorum are long past.

    BTW: well said Slide.

  21. 21.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 10:31 am

    Correction: Bush’s approval numbers regarding Katrina are lower in Zogby (36%) than in the CBS poll (38%)

  22. 22.

    Buckaroo

    September 8, 2005 at 10:33 am

    Slide (et. all)-
    I think you miss the point. John isn’t saying who’s worse, he was simply saying that this is brazen and ugly. As a Democrat, I agree- Moveon is in a tie with NARAL to be the left’s NRA. And Frankly, I’m disgusted by anyone who whould try to justify it with a ‘who shot first’ answer. It’s pathetic.

  23. 23.

    Miracle Max

    September 8, 2005 at 10:35 am

    Oh please. Any political argument on policies pertaining to life and death is going to lean on the suffering of victims to underscore the urgency of whatever is being advocated.

    The argument can be presented well or not, and be well-founded or not, and however you judge these qualities will depend on your own opinion.

    Does the victimization in N.O. have anything to do with race? Of course it does. Do Roberts’ views have anything to do with race issues — agree with them or not — of course they do.

    Any effort to rule such a connection out of order is just a back-door way of arguing that conservative ideology presents no controversy in matters of race that even merits argument.

    Free your mind — your ass will follow.

  24. 24.

    p.lukasiak

    September 8, 2005 at 10:36 am

    hey, the White House is hiding the evidence needed to prove (or disprove) Move-on’s legitimate questions about Roberts view of the government’s role in ensuring equal protection under the law without regard to race and social class.

    We DO know that he was an advocate of de facto segregation — the kind of right-winger who claims he’s not a racist, but is perfectly willing to allow “separate and unequal” to continue as long as its not MANDATED by the state.

    So, IMHO, the questions raised by Move-On are perfectly legitimate — Roberts is certainly the kind of judge that would blame the poor black residents of New Orleans for being poor and black and thus more likely to have their suffering disregarded by Rich White Republican political hacks that were appointed by Bush.

  25. 25.

    Buckaroo

    September 8, 2005 at 10:39 am

    As with the NARAL ad, it’s not the questions per se, but the framing of them that is at best profoundly tin-eared and at worst an abhorrent misuse of a too-recent tragedy.

  26. 26.

    Krista

    September 8, 2005 at 10:39 am

    Whether or not you agree with this, I thought you might find it amusing.

    And I will say this: Hurricane Katrina is George Bush’s Monica Lewinsky. The only difference is this: Tens of thousands of people weren’t stranded in Monica Lewinsky’s vagina.” — Jon Stewart

  27. 27.

    Doug

    September 8, 2005 at 10:41 am

    If I were Moveon.org, I wouldn’t have chosen race as the underlying issue. I would have tried to tie the incompetent response to Hurricane Katrina to the conservative effort to starve government until it is small enough to drown in the bathtub. I would have tied it to the laissez-faire Social Darwinian “sink or swim” philosophy. And I would have pointed out that Roberts has been a soldier in the conservative movement. I would have closed by asking for appointment of a Justice who believes that government has an important role in providing a safety net for its citizens.

  28. 28.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 10:49 am

    I agree Doug.

    To be honest, while i agree with MoveOn in spirit, i always feel like they’re just a bit off target with every media play they make. Even during the elections, i thought that all of their commercials were generally weak.

  29. 29.

    Jim Allen

    September 8, 2005 at 10:52 am

    Krista, you should put in the whole quote:

    “Now, for you people who are saying, `Well, stop pointing fingers at the president…left-wing…the media’s being too hard:

    No. SHUT…UP! No! This is inarguably—inarguably—a failure of leadership from the top of the federal government.

    Remember when Bill Clinton went out with Monica Lewinsky? That was inarguably a failure of judgment at the top. Democrats had to come out and risk losing credibility if they did not condemn Bill Clinton for his behavior. I believe Republicans are in the same position right now. And I will say this: Hurricane Katrina is George Bush’s Monica Lewinsky. The only difference is that tens of thousands of people weren’t stranded in Monica Lewinsky’s vagina.”
    –Jon Stewart

  30. 30.

    John Cole

    September 8, 2005 at 10:53 am

    I am serious Blue Neponset-

    This post wasn’t to piss you off by being in your face, but learning what these guys are doing should piss you off.

    And that would be the same if the Goper’s were doing it.

  31. 31.

    Cyrus

    September 8, 2005 at 11:01 am

    Yeah, that ad is really out there. I won’t swear on a Bible to never, ever give MoveOn a donation. But it got less likely and if I ever do, I’ll have to hold my nose.

  32. 32.

    ppGaz

    September 8, 2005 at 11:03 am

    Agreed.

  33. 33.

    docG

    September 8, 2005 at 11:06 am

    Judge Roberts will be confirmed despite the name calling, foot stomping, and naysaying from the left. Pick your battles. On this one its time to “move on”.

  34. 34.

    Bob Munck

    September 8, 2005 at 11:23 am

    It’s a very important issue right now. We’re being set up for back-to-back racist Chief Justices, and it’s important to show both the presence of racism in someone being proposed for an important position and the effects of racism by people in important positions.

  35. 35.

    Pb

    September 8, 2005 at 11:23 am

    Yeah, that sounds somewhat tenuous and over-the-top.

    However… Katrina Changed Everything(TM). :)

    Anyhow, I agree, MoveOn.org can be quite shrill and politically tone-deaf sometimes. But their heart is in the right place, which is more than I can say for some political groups. One initiative they launched recently that I haven’t seen people talking about enough–HurricaneHousing.org. It amazes me how quickly so many people volunteered so much. (“217,651 beds volunteered so far!”)

  36. 36.

    Tim F

    September 8, 2005 at 11:27 am

    Since I’m technically away I’ll just recycle from my last post:

    if you have this much spare outrage then you might spend some on what the people who govern America are actually doing.

  37. 37.

    NYCmoderate

    September 8, 2005 at 11:29 am

    docG says:

    Judge Roberts will be confirmed despite the name calling, foot stomping, and naysaying from the left. Pick your battles. On this one its time to “move on”.

    I don’t disagree that he’s going to be confirmed. What the left and the Democratic Party have to gain is showing the public what the right and the Republican Party find acceptable, indeed what they champion. There will be people who disagree with that and on a strictly political level, the Democrats need to swing those people to their “side” in order to win elections.

    I already know what the next part of this argument is (they need to do more than just paint the GOP negatively), but I’m trying to pay attention in class, so I’m not going to spell it out just now. ;-)

  38. 38.

    Phil Smith

    September 8, 2005 at 11:37 am

    Slide, I’ll stipulate that that’s a disgusting article. However, I fail to see how the rantings of a Randite have anything to do with — well, anything. They’re no more representative of the policies of this administration than Lew Rockwell or Justin Raimondo. Citing that article is the equivalent of pointing to an article in the Socialist Worker’s Daily and calling it Democrat.

  39. 39.

    Demdude

    September 8, 2005 at 11:50 am

    Since the beginning of time, tragedy has been used by political movements. This tragedy will be used to prove a point sooner or later (I would have preferred later).

    I agree with a lot of Move On’s positions, but I agree, they definitely need a new media director. Their media work seems to be poorly written and this one is quite a stretch.

  40. 40.

    confused

    September 8, 2005 at 11:51 am

    It is a disgusting ad. It is a really sad state of affairs that anyone would try to defend this crap, even if that defense only amounts to “they do disgusting things too!” When crap like this gets defended, it really takes a lot of the oomph out of criticisms that Bush and the republicans are are morally bankrupt. Plus, it just gives them fodder, and they are apparently more skillful at using it, judging from the last couple of elections. Why give them any additional help? How about each “side” starts worrying about what they are doing, rather than trying to sink lower than the other side? Honestly, from the sidelines it looks like the major difference between Reps and Dems is that the Reps are more politically suave and therefore in power.

  41. 41.

    mutterings

    September 8, 2005 at 11:56 am

    Pretty tacky – and I agree it’s payback. But it’s also a serious waste of money. When was the last time the Senate actually cared about what their constituents wanted? They vote money – not voters. They figure, and it seems to be true, that when it comes time to be reelected the money will turn the trick.
    I wish I could quit caring.

  42. 42.

    SomeCallMeTim

    September 8, 2005 at 11:58 am

    I’ll take that bet, John. The single biggest problem I, as an actual American, have with Republicans is that they make no attempt to address the basic and well-known democratic issue of tyranny of the majority. It plays into individual rights, like the right to trial, and it plays into disparate treatment of disfavored minorities, as in Jim Crow laws or affirmative-action programs.

    To the extent that the suffering of those in New Orleans was a result of disparate treatment of a disfavored minority, it is related to Roberts’ judicial philosophy. I think that’s the point. (I haven’t seen or read about the ad beyond what you’ve written.)

  43. 43.

    p.lukasiak

    September 8, 2005 at 11:58 am

    It is a disgusting ad. It is a really sad state of affairs that anyone would try to defend this crap,

    what is disgusting is that anyone would object to an ad that highlights Robert’s support for defacto segregation…. what happened in New Orleans is a perfect example of the consequences of such segregation, and provides an appropriate jumping off point to discuss the REAL John Roberts….

  44. 44.

    Anderson

    September 8, 2005 at 11:58 am

    Is MoveOn secretly funded by Karl Rove?

    What a bunch of morons.

    There are SO MANY great commercials to be made, explaining the truth about this administration, & instead we get this garbage.

  45. 45.

    SomeCallMeTim

    September 8, 2005 at 11:59 am

    And if you don’t think that Kayne West was strictly correct, you’re crazy.

  46. 46.

    dave in boca

    September 8, 2005 at 12:05 pm

    There is a lot of hysterical delirium being demonstrated by Dems like Pelosi, who misconstrues a Bush conversation with her and does a public hissy fit. She is merely delusional herself if she thinks this kind of public tantrum gains political traction. But the moronic moveon move just goes to the limit of no-class imbecilic nonsense.

  47. 47.

    tBone

    September 8, 2005 at 12:12 pm

    Is MoveOn secretly funded by Karl Rove?

    It would certainly explain a lot. Really disgusting play by MoveOn – do they actually think this is helpful in any way?

  48. 48.

    confused

    September 8, 2005 at 12:20 pm

    How about actually detailing Robert’s support for defacto segregation? Show what he has actually done instead of simply trying to horrify people with awful images. And I will be extremely surprised if they actually use it as a “jumping off point to discuss the REAL John Roberts.” I am betting that the images will pretty much be the point of the whole ad. Much like PETA, moveon seems to be about shocking and offending people, not really about the issues they pretend to be about. Again, this type of crap doesn’t do anything to help Dems, it just pisses off a lot of people that otherwise might side with the Dems. Going to extreme measures to try to make a point rarely persuades anyone that isn’t already at the extremes, and those people don’t need persuading.

  49. 49.

    Otto Man

    September 8, 2005 at 12:23 pm

    I’m with Doug. There’s a great case to be made here on the merits of Roberts’ small government philosophy, and no need to go scraping up accusations of racism.

    And crying wolf on Roberts only makes it less likely that alarms over a real wingnut will be taken seriously. Keep your powder dry, kids.

  50. 50.

    DJAnyReason

    September 8, 2005 at 12:23 pm

    Dave in Boca sez:

    There is a lot of hysterical delirium being demonstrated by Dems like Pelosi, who misconstrues a Bush conversation with her and does a public hissy fit.

    Uhh, Dave? Were you on the line for that call? How do you know its misconstrued?

  51. 51.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 12:25 pm

    What a surprise! Moveon.org shows itself to be a race-pimping, hysterical bunch of loons who will do anything, broadcast anything, and publish anything — regardless how outrageous or false — to push its liberal agenda. Oh, wait, that’s no shocker at all. They’ve never proved themselves to be anything but.

    Any American who doesn’t immediately denounce this wannabe-Kanye ad has no shred of decency.

    Blaming conservatives or (if you can even fathom the limited intelligence needed to swallow this BS) JUDGE ROBERTS for the suffering of Katrina victims — you know, because obviously, Roberts’ possible insensitivity to a certain civil rights issue is what obviously caused those people who didn’t evacuate to be flooded, and obviously caused FEMA to refuse to whisk the black victims all away immediately on FEMA magic carpets (which were obviously reserved for Whitey!) , and obviously caused them to be poor in the first place — is not at all the same as Bush using references to 9/11 in his campaign.

    It would be the same if Bush’s campaign had said, “John Kerry and the Democrats’ failure to take terrorism seriously obviously caused 9/11.” But his campaign never made that “I blame HIM!” ad, so can the Moveon apologists (and that’s what they are) please stop parroting an obviously false and desperate analogy?

    I do like how the Democrats are pretending that they are just “responding” to the hardball that the mean old GOP has been playing with them for years, as if they are the weak, innocent, noble lion-cub finally discovering that they need to use their teeth and claws. What a load of crap. If any Democrats actually believe this load, they are either delusional or ignorant of history. Democrats have played just as much “hardball” as Republicans throught the years, so they should — and I know the following sentiment is anathema to liberals — stop pretending to be the “victim.”

    It would be refreshing to see the Democrats en masse denounce the race-pimps… just once. I won’t hold my breath, though.

  52. 52.

    Boronx

    September 8, 2005 at 12:27 pm

    My problem is not with the nature of the ad. If Roberts had said something like “The disparity between blacks and whites is not a problem, it is the natural order!”

    Then the ad would be totally appropriate. Roberts did not say anything like that, of course. Here’s his offense:

    In the memos, Roberts advocated scaling back affirmative action and argued against a federal program the favored minorities who sought broadcast licenses. Roberts’ precise views today are unclear, however, because his role then was to reflect the policies of conservative administrations.

    That’s two or three issues now where the horrible thing Roberts wrote didn’t live up to expectation, not even counting the lawyer jokes that so many didn’t get. If you want to make out that the guy is a monster, you better be able to show something monsterous on his part.

  53. 53.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 12:27 pm

    There is a lot of hysterical delirium being demonstrated by Dems like Pelosi, who misconstrues a Bush conversation with her and does a public hissy fit. She is merely delusional herself if she thinks this kind of public tantrum gains political traction. But the moronic moveon move just goes to the limit of no-class imbecilic nonsense.

    One, i don’t think Pelosi can gain political traction with anything. She’s a terrible Minority Leader and should be replaced.

    But aside from that: I just noticed that everything that Democrats and the left does is torn apart from a political, insider standpoint. By both the left and the right.

    The Right gets a much easier ride, especially from it’s own.

    Notice: In this thread, you have Dems and Reps criticizing the MoveOn ad equally. There are some general supporters but it’s a pretty balanced and, i would argue, fair, assessment of it. Loudest heard seem to be the groans from Democrats saying, “Can’t you do any better?”

    But compare it to the reaction to any of Bush’s numerous jackass photo-ops this past week, the fireman one in particular. You really aren’t hearing dissent from the Right. Sure, last week there was a decent amount of people on the Right criticizing the photo-ops, but it was in the context of, “Bush needs to do more” not “Damn, that’s a pathetic photo op.”

    And let me tell you, that fireman photo-op is a sad bit of PR crap.

    This extends to the media as well. They criticize the PR context of what Democrats do and ignore the substance. For Republicans, they play along with the PR world of make believe as if it’s true.

    Maybe it’s because the Reps are in power and the Dems aren’t. But i really think Party Hackery plays a bigger role. Republicans just don’t criticize their own. Ever. (As John Cole is illustrating this week. And he’s a MODERATE!)

    The rules just don’t seem to be applied the same for the two parties.

    Another reason i advocate picking up the nearest brick and smashing the Republican Party. Because no rules ever apply.

  54. 54.

    Boronx

    September 8, 2005 at 12:29 pm

    “What went wrong?” can be construed two ways. Either he doesn’t know, or he’s quizzing her. If the former, he is bubble boy, if the latter, he is a thin skinned bully and insane to boot.

  55. 55.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 12:39 pm

    But aside from that: I just noticed that everything that Democrats and the left does is torn apart from a political, insider standpoint. By both the left and the right.

    The Right gets a much easier ride, especially from it’s own.

    Oh, now the left are the victims of their own openmindedness. What a burden for you all! ((Cough, cough))

    When the GOP puts out an ad saying that the liberal Democrat welfare state in New Orleans CAUSED their flood disaster, you’ll see the blowback. But the GOP doesn’t run on hate like the Democrats of Howard (“I Hate Republicans”) Dean, so that ad would never be made.

  56. 56.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 12:42 pm

    John Cole:

    This post wasn’t to piss you off by being in your face, but learning what these guys are doing should piss you off.

    The These Guys being MoveOn.org of course not the top three guys running FEMA that have no disaster experience whatsover but were just political pals of Bush.

    DIVERSION 101 Right out of the ROVE playbook.

  57. 57.

    Kimmitt

    September 8, 2005 at 12:50 pm

    the GOP doesn’t run on hate

    Hee.

    Anyways, I’m against the ad, because it’s stupid and bad politics. Moveon puts out a lot of really bad ads, which is why they don’t get my money.

  58. 58.

    John Cole

    September 8, 2005 at 12:53 pm

    You caught me Joe. I was emailed personally by Rove this morning.

    I, like you, am incapable of holding two thoughts in my head concomitantly, and therefore repudiate my outrage at the MoveOn idiots and direct it all at targets of your choosing.

    Anything else, petunia?

  59. 59.

    Northman

    September 8, 2005 at 12:54 pm

    I will publicly acknowledge and credit anyone who can explain how this is not the shameless exploitation of a tragedy for immediate and unrelated political gain:

    It is shameless exploitation but from most of the comments here, and my own feelings, the likely response to Moveon.org’s attempt to sway public opinion will likely be a backlash against themselves. I can’t see them getting any immediate political gain from it, even if the tragedy isn’t totally unrelated, just very tangentially. Do you actually think this will have a negative effect on Robert’s chances for confirmation?

    As noted above, it almost appears as though Rove were funding these morons.

  60. 60.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 12:55 pm

    DIVERSION 101 : HOW IT WORKS

    1) fuck up really, really, really bad

    2) wait for the inevitable critism

    3) pluck out someone that is making the criticism

    4) attack with all guns the messenger

    5) right wing echo chamber repeats and repeats and repeats.

    6) MSM picks up story becaue everyone is talking about it.

    EXAMPLE:

    1) do absolutely nothing even though you have a CIA memo saying “Bin landen determined to stike inside the USA”

    2) Richard Clarke levels some criticism

    3) attack Richard Clarke

    4) right wing echo chamber discusses the failings of Richard Clarke ad nauseam

    5) MSM discusses if Richard Clarke is a partisan incompetent just trying to make money.

    Further examples:

    Abu Garib
    Gitmo
    WMD in Iraq
    Leaking Ms. Wilson’s name
    Quagmire in Iraq
    DIVERSIION 101.

  61. 61.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 12:56 pm

    When the GOP puts out an ad saying that the liberal Democrat welfare state in New Orleans CAUSED their flood disaster, you’ll see the blowback.

    Wrong. The GOP compares liberals to terrorists all the time. There was never any blowback.

    But the GOP doesn’t run on hate like the Democrats of Howard (“I Hate Republicans”) Dean, so that ad would never be made.

    Republicans do nothing but hate. They ran an entire campaign on hating gays. They hate liberals, they hate Michael Moore, they hate MoveOn, they hate both Clintons, they hate Hollywood, they hate breasts, they hate sex. They are filled with and are driven by hate.

    This is the other patented, uber-consistent tactic of the Right. Always, ALWAYS directly accuse the opposition of their own negatives. Force them into a position of having to say, “No, that’s you!”

    As beat-around-the-bush Kerry might have been, Bush was a much larger flip-flopper on issues.
    Accuse Democrats of being wild-eyed crazies even though that describes the Right’s foot soldiers. (Coulter, Rush, Malkin, Savage)
    Accusing the Dems of playing the blame game with Katrina as the Republican noise machine continuously blame local and state officials.
    Accusing the Democrats of playing poltics with 9/11 as BushCo exploit it to the highest degree possible.
    Attacking activists judges when their goal is to appoint activist conservative judges.

    The list goes on and on. You just added to it with you point about hate.

  62. 62.

    jobiuspublius

    September 8, 2005 at 12:58 pm

    That article has been
    updated.

    A liberal interest group Thursday denied it ever planned to use televised images of poverty-stricken evacuees from Hurricane Katrina as part of a provocative, last-minute effort to divert federal Judge John Roberts’ path to confirmation as chief justice.

    MoveOn.org Political Action’s advocacy director Ben Brandzel had laid out plans for such an ad to USA TODAY on Wednesday. But Thursday, the group’s executive director said “we regret any misunderstanding that may have arisen because of anything that our staff member might have told USA TODAY’s reporter.”

    “We have no plans, and have never had plans, to produce such an ad,” Eli Pariser added.

    Brandzel had said MoveOn would unveil a TV ad on Monday that questions whether Roberts is sensitive enough to civil rights concerns to lead the Supreme Court. The ad would suggest that the plight of the mostly African-American evacuees in New Orleans showed that poverty remains a serious problem among minorities, Brandzel said. In a mix of judicial and racial politics, the ad would suggest that minorities could suffer if the Senate confirms Roberts.

  63. 63.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 1:00 pm

    COLE:

    Anything else, petunia?

    Yeah, still waiting for your OUTRAGE, of which you seem to hav e plenty of, at the appointing of three political hacks to the top posts at FEMA, the agency charged with dealing with the inevitable terrorist attack, that we have been told repeatedly by this adminstration is a matter of when not if?
    Don’t think I have heard you mention a word about it yet? Still, waiting for all the facts to come in?

  64. 64.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 1:05 pm

    Trent, great post and right on the money. The party of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson, Mike Savage, Sean Vannity, Mike Gallagher, and Bill O’reilly saying the GOP doesn’t run on HATE like the Dems, is just too precious.

  65. 65.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    Yeah, still waiting for your OUTRAGE, of which you seem to have plenty of, at the appointing of three political hacks to the top posts at FEMA

    I’m coming to realize that John Cole IS a political hack.

    Too bad, this precious, highly rated blog is losing credibility by the day. We’ll see how well-regarded it remains.

  66. 66.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    Your gonna love this one John

    Although Jay-Z said he hasn’t “spoken to anyone about doing a concert event” to benefit Katrina victims, he says he wants to speak with Sean “Diddy” Combs about starting a fund exclusively to help blacks in times of crisis. “Just in case anything like this happens in the future, we can do what the elder Bush and (former President Bill) Clinton are doing for our people specifically.”

    Source

    White folks need not apply. What a classy guy that Jay-Z is. Not racist at all.

  67. 67.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    Wrong. The GOP compares liberals to terrorists all the time. There was never any blowback.

    Well, if you say so, that’s all the proof you need, I suppose. I mean, who needs links?

    Republicans do nothing but hate. They ran an entire campaign on hating gays.

    Oh, I see your problem… you can’t differentiate between disagreeing with policy decisions and “hate.” You should really learn the difference…although your party chair never did.

    This is the other patented, uber-consistent tactic of the Right. Always, ALWAYS directly accuse the opposition of their own negatives. Force them into a position of having to say, “No, that’s you!”

    You have no idea how ironic that paragraph is. You are accusing the GOP of attacking with their own negatives, but knowing the Democrats also use this tactic, aren’t you just admitting that it’s actually the DEMOCRATS who attack with their own negatives? I’ll give an example:

    I’ll wait for you to find that quote of Ken Mehlman saying “I hate Democrats.” Go ahead. I’ll wait.

  68. 68.

    John Cole

    September 8, 2005 at 1:11 pm

    Yeah, still waiting for your OUTRAGE, of which you seem to hav e plenty of, at the appointing of three political hacks to the top posts at FEMA, the agency charged with dealing with the inevitable terrorist attack, that we have been told repeatedly by this adminstration is a matter of when not if?

    I can say, with almost virtual certainty, that the angrier you get, the less likely I am to ever say anything like thatt, for no other reason to push you to a stroke.

    Really, Joe. I respect you THAT little.

  69. 69.

    Big E

    September 8, 2005 at 1:12 pm

    re: shameless exploitation

    Certainly both sides do it, I would suggest Republicans have it down to a science and do it better. Max Cleland, 911, War in Iraq (I’ve lost track of the reasons why we are there), among the many and more recently, ….

    U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., asked House Speaker Dennis Hastert not to send federal disaster aid to officials in Louisiana, calling state and local government there incompetent and corrupt. http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_4063498,00.html
    Well, I guess making the people suffer more becuse ol’ Tom wants to make a political point is a good way to approach the disaster relief effort. Pelosi, says she does’nt believe the president gets the serious nature of the disaster, that’s her opinion, at least she is not advocating holding back assistance.

    ‘Incompetent and corrupt’…I would think that there is enough of that going around in the entire federal government.

    Dems need a serious spokesperson.
    Bottom line is that the republicans are in charge and running the government. Accountabilty should begin and end with them.

  70. 70.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:14 pm

    The party of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson, Mike Savage, Sean Vannity, Mike Gallagher, and Bill O’reilly saying the GOP doesn’t run on HATE like the Dems, is just too precious.

    So the GOP is the Party of…not one Republican Party Official???? Those are all entertainers, dude. Talk show hosts. Are the Democrats the Party of Howard Stern and Rosie O’Donnell? I’m beginning to think they are the Party of Horrible Posters.

    So give me a quote from a Republican Party Official (or even an elected representative) who can match Howard (“I Hate Republicans”) Dean for pure Hatred. I’ll wait for you, too.

  71. 71.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 1:20 pm

    Camp Chelsea

    Well if you believe the crap many of them like to spew, no Republican politician is actually elected anyway. So you can understand the confusion.

  72. 72.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:21 pm

    Well, I guess making the people suffer more becuse ol’ Tom wants to make a political point is a good way to approach the disaster relief effort. Pelosi, says she does’nt believe the president gets the serious nature of the disaster, that’s her opinion, at least she is not advocating holding back assistance.

    Neither is Tancredo, if you’d bother to read the next sentence of the article you cite. You must’ve ACCIDENTALLY cut it off. I know you wouldn’t selectively edit to leave a false impression!

    In a letter to Hastert on Wednesday, Tancredo urged the speaker to create a “bipartisan select committee” of members of Congress to oversee federal disaster spending in Louisiana.

    No deprivation of aid. He just wants to make sure that the aid gets to where it needs to go…the bastard!

  73. 73.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 1:22 pm

    Champ Chelsea you are kidding aren’t you? This was satire right?

    Want a link? ok here’s one

    Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism (Hardcover)
    by Ann Coulter

    Here is another:

    100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37) (Hardcover)
    by Bernard Goldberg “WHY DO so MANY AMERICANS who ought to know better find the United States such a terrible place?.

    And just one more:

    “Surrounded by Idiots – Fighting Liberal Lunacy in America” by Michael Gallagher (William Morrow, 240 pages).

    Crazy, Treasonous, Dangerous Liberals.

  74. 74.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 1:29 pm

    Reading comprehenstion is not the strong suit of some of you folks. Camp Chelsea asked for an example of a Republican politician that matches the overheated republican hating rhetoric of Dean. Got any?

  75. 75.

    Bob Munck

    September 8, 2005 at 1:29 pm

    Interestingly, the White House is now claiming that Katrina makes it necessary to privatize Social Security.

    I will publicly acknowledge and credit anyone who can explain how this is not the shameless exploitation of a tragedy for immediate and unrelated political gain

  76. 76.

    Mike S

    September 8, 2005 at 1:32 pm

    You caught me Joe. I was emailed personally by Rove this morning.

    Did he say “You’re doing a great job, Colie” or what? Do tell.

  77. 77.

    Another Jeff

    September 8, 2005 at 1:34 pm

    OK, Bob Grandmaster Munck, I’ll take you up on that.

    Assuming that is happening the way you say it is, since there isn’t a link, I, as a moderate Republican, would like to say that it’s shameless exploitation.

    There, note to some of you lefties, see how easy that was. I said it’s shameless exploitation. I didn’t say “it’s pretty bad but the other side is a big bunch of poopyheads. And they’re way meaner”, like some of you ten year olds do.

    I simply agreed with his point and now that i’m finished eating, i’m going back to work.

  78. 78.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:37 pm

    Slide —

    You DO understand that Bernie Goldberg and Ann Coulter aren’t Republican Party Officials, right?

    Please tell me your black-and-white brain can see that difference.

  79. 79.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 1:38 pm

    Reading comprehenstion is not the strong suit of some of you folks. Camp Chelsea asked for an example of a Republican politician that matches the overheated republican hating rhetoric of Dean. Got any?

    You’re propping your argument on “reading comprehension” while fixating on the single word “HATE”. That’s not reading comprehension (Which is understanding full paragraphs) but vocabulary. (The meaning of single words.)

    I stand by my statement: Republicans ran an entire campaign on hating gays. It was far more than a differece of policy opinion. It was demonizing a significant part of the population for political gain.

  80. 80.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:39 pm

    i’m finished eating, i’m going back to work.

    ANOTHER difference between you and the left. (/cheapshot)

  81. 81.

    jobiuspublius

    September 8, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    Trent Lott, …

  82. 82.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    You DO understand that Bernie Goldberg and Ann Coulter aren’t Republican Party Officials, right?

    They are party loyalists who represent and defend the Republican Party. You’re playing semantics which is a childs game.

  83. 83.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    Republicans ran an entire campaign on hating gays. It was far more than a differece of policy opinion. It was demonizing a significant part of the population for political gain.

    Again, heckuva nuanced mind you have there! You either agree with a group, or you “hate” them. I guess I hate a few of my friends — I never knew!

  84. 84.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    Chimp Chelsea says that Coulter isnt’ a republican offical. Fair enough. Neithter are the people at MoveOn.org which is what this thred is about.

    If you want to contend that the republicans are just little innocent victims of all that Dem hate fine. Dont think many rational people would agree with you.

    I rather live in the Reality Based world that most of you have long long ago forsaken.

  85. 85.

    Bob Munck

    September 8, 2005 at 1:43 pm

    Assuming that is happening the way you say it is, since there isn’t a link,

    It’s in CongressDaily, which is behind a heavy subscription wall. However, the quote is:

    “[White House spokesman Trent] Duffy asserted that the vast spending that would be required to address the hurricane’s impact adds to the need to change Social Security, which threatens to strain the budget in coming years.”

  86. 86.

    p.lukasiak

    September 8, 2005 at 1:43 pm

    That’s two or three issues now where the horrible thing Roberts wrote didn’t live up to expectation, not even counting the lawyer jokes that so many didn’t get. If you want to make out that the guy is a monster, you better be able to show something monsterous on his part.

    why am I not surprised to see that you don’t mention Roberts support for de facto school segregation? Roberts opposition to Affirmative Action and his support of de facto school segregation is of a piece —- he really does appear to see the disparities between blacks and whites in this nation as the “natural order of things”—or at least not worth doing anything about.

  87. 87.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 1:45 pm

    jobiuspublius

    In what regard?

  88. 88.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 1:46 pm

    …Roberts opposition to Affirmative Action…

    You do know that AA is racist right?

  89. 89.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 1:48 pm

    They are party loyalists who represent and defend the Republican Party. You’re playing semantics which is a childs game.

    It’s not semantics, and you’re still not playing it very well. If you can’t satisfy the terms I originally defined, just say, “I can’t do it. You’re right.” It’s easy: Republican officials are Republican officials. Those that are NOT Republican officials are NOT Republican officals.

    Howard (“I Hate Republicans”) Dean is the Chair of the Democratic Party. If I would’ve wanted to quote entertainers, I would’ve quoted Whoopi Goldberg.

  90. 90.

    Jim Allen

    September 8, 2005 at 1:49 pm

    Re: “Camp Chelsea asked for an example of a Republican politician that matches the overheated republican hating rhetoric of Dean. Got any?”

    How about Cheney telling Senator Leahy to go fuck himself?

  91. 91.

    SeesThroughIt

    September 8, 2005 at 1:49 pm

    But the GOP doesn’t run on hate

    Anybody who truly believes this isn’t really worth talking to because idealogues never make for good conversation (though they can be funny to watch).

    The MoveOn non-ad would’ve been pretty disgusting, had it actually been made and aired. I agree, it would’ve been sad to see so many people sink to the level of Bush’s base.

    Slide: You’re right about Diversion 101 (after all, is it ever time for politics under Bush?), but I hardly think John is practicing anything like that at all. There’s a lot of stuff to be pissed off about right now; John was merely offering up yet another.

  92. 92.

    Bob Munck

    September 8, 2005 at 1:55 pm

    You do know that AA is racist right?

    No, it isn’t. It’s an attempt to undo the long-term effects of racism. Saying Affirmative Action is racist is like saying that (to bring us back to the present time) Katrina relief efforts are racist because they go disproportionately to blacks.

  93. 93.

    james richardson

    September 8, 2005 at 1:55 pm

    well, we can say moveon.org is a typical representation of liberalism, if we can say focus on the family is a typical representation of conservatism…

    that’s why you receive so much flak John. you’re one of the few moderates left, and your only talking points are your own.

  94. 94.

    Big E

    September 8, 2005 at 1:56 pm

    Champ Chelsea;

    Tancredi in his statement advocates stopping relief efforts until a bi-partisan commitee is created. He says further down in the article , ” I hope the House will refrain from directly appropriating any funds . . . to either the state of Louisiana or the city of New Orleans,”.

    So his theory seems to be, let’s wait, form a committee and not worry about people who need assistance right now. He further states in the article that NOLA has a ‘long history of corruption’ and that the current Democratic officials “demonstrated mind-boggling incompetence in their lack of planning for and response to this disaster.” Even if you accept his reasoning, (which I do not) Tancredi still wants to stop aid until a committee decides what to do.
    Tancredi in the article is not very critical of efforts by FEMA, just a case of, ‘bureaucratic ineptitude’. Hmmm

  95. 95.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 1:57 pm

    If you REALLY want to learn about the right wing attack machine and how it operates I suggest you read this article which the below snippets are from:

    Indeed, the Republican Attack Machine is now such an entrenched part of the political landscape that it no longer seems remarkable — until you stop and think about the corrosive effect it has on our political discourse. And few have benefited from its toxic rhetoric as much as George W. Bush.

    THERE ARE MANY examples of the Republican Attack Machine’s relentless drive to demonize its critics, so many that it would be nearly impossible to cite them all — from Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon’s being disinvited from an appearance at the Baseball Hall of Fame because of their anti-war statements to the Dixie Chicks’ being excoriated as virtual enemies of the state because lead singer Natalie Maines commented that she was ashamed Bush was a fellow Texan.

    The effect is to create an atmosphere in which dissent — and dissenters — are publicly humiliated, their careers and livelihoods threatened, thus serving as an object lesson to anyone else who might think about deviating from the Republican-defined patriotic line.

    Typical was an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal last September by that pompous fraud William Bennett. “Mr. Gore’s speech was more critical of President Bush than our enemies,” Bennett tut-tutted, as if that somehow proved Gore had a higher regard for Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein than he did for Bush.

    The late Michael Kelly, an old-fashioned liberal who was an honorary member of the Republican Attack Machine, was apoplectic, writing in the Washington Post of Gore’s speech, “It distinguished Gore, now and forever, as someone who cannot be considered a responsible aspirant to power…. It was dishonest, cheap, low. It was hollow…. It was wretched. It was vile. It was contemptible. But I understate.”

    Oh, btw, Bill Bennett was a Republican offical wasn’t he? I mean before he was a degenerate gambler losing millions of dollars? Do you consider his comments to be pretty HATEFUL? Saying Gore had a higher regard for Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein than he did for Bush.

  96. 96.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:00 pm

    If you want to contend that the republicans are just little innocent victims of all that Dem hate fine.

    Sigh. Republicans don’t aspire to the “victim” mentality.

    The point was that you’ll never see a GOP-supported ad like the abominable one MoveOn had produced (but has evidently aborted due to righteous indignation of human beings everywhere), because the level of pure hate in the GOP just can’t match that of the Party of Dean.

  97. 97.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:01 pm

    How about Cheney telling Senator Leahy to go fuck himself?

    I say that to my friends and enemies alike. But I don’t hate them.

  98. 98.

    SeesThroughIt

    September 8, 2005 at 2:04 pm

    The point was that you’ll never see a GOP-supported ad like the abominable one MoveOn had produced (but has evidently aborted due to righteous indignation of human beings everywhere), because the level of pure hate in the GOP just can’t match that of the Party of Dean.

    So you’re saying the Swift Boat Liars for Orwellian Society were actually Democrats? Max Cleland voluntarily had his image comflated with that of Osama bin Laden? Wow…can I buy a little of what you’re smoking? It must be some pretty good stuff.

  99. 99.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:05 pm

    A little quiz. Which left wing Bush Hater said this:

    “The bottom line is that despite the fact the president was strapped with two governors who bungled this crisis badly, in the end it is the president who sends in the National Guard and FEMA relief. The president’s suggestion that the size of this storm caught all by surprise just doesn’t get it. His administration was 48 hours late sending in the National Guard and poor Americans got raped and killed because of those mistakes.”

    First one with the right answer gets a Slide ‘attaboy award’.

  100. 100.

    sean

    September 8, 2005 at 2:05 pm

    how about Jesse Helms saying Pres. Clinton “better watch out” and “would need a bodyguard” if he came to N. Carolina. if calling for someone’s assassination isn’t hateful, I don’t know what is

  101. 101.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:07 pm

    the Chimp Chelsea has been officially declared the Kool-aid drinking champion of the Western Hemisphere.

  102. 102.

    sean

    September 8, 2005 at 2:07 pm

    Joe Scarborough!!!!

  103. 103.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:08 pm

    Anybody who truly believes this isn’t really worth talking to because idealogues never make for good conversation (though they can be funny to watch).

    LOL! That’s the most ironic reasoning I’ve heard all week. If you don’t think the GOP “runs on hate,” then you are an ideologue? Kettle. Again, are you guys winding me up? Is this a put-on? You can’t be this dense.

    The MoveOn non-ad would’ve been pretty disgusting, had it actually been made and aired. I agree, it would’ve been sad to see so many people sink to the level of Bush’s base.

    The ad was greenlighted and made, I guarantee — they weren’t going to slap together a national TV ad tomorrow to run on Monday.

    Again, the “sinking to Bush’s level” meme is baseless and weak.

  104. 104.

    Another Jeff

    September 8, 2005 at 2:10 pm

    “You can’t be this dense.”

    Champ, you’re obviously new here.

  105. 105.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:10 pm

    Newt Gingrich:

    “The supporters of the President [Clinton] are the enemies of normal Americans.”

    Is it hateful to say your opponents are the enemies of normal americans?

    Do you want us to continue Chimp?

  106. 106.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 2:11 pm

    i would bet that Champ is 15

  107. 107.

    SeesThroughIt

    September 8, 2005 at 2:12 pm

    Hey, Champ, you’re the one who claims the GOP isn’t a bastion of hate despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Enjoy stewing in your own ideological juices. I’m enjoying watching it. You’re a pretty funny guy.

  108. 108.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:12 pm

    Sean WINS. Yes, indeed, that paragon of left wing treason, Joe Scarborough, who has a lot of expereince with hurricanes and FEMA respnose did in fact say:

    “The bottom line is that despite the fact the president was strapped with two governors who bungled this crisis badly, in the end it is the president who sends in the National Guard and FEMA relief. The president’s suggestion that the size of this storm caught all by surprise just doesn’t get it. His administration was 48 hours late sending in the National Guard and poor Americans got raped and killed because of those mistakes.”

    ATTABOY Sean

  109. 109.

    sean

    September 8, 2005 at 2:13 pm

    thanks Slide. i don’t watch his show much, but he’s been pretty good in his disaster coverage

  110. 110.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:14 pm

    Chimp? callin the supporters of Clinton “enemies of normal Americans”, does that fit your definition of a party offical expressing hatred? This is an honesty test. Lets hear it. Yes… or No… we’re all waiting with bated breath.

  111. 111.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 2:15 pm

    No, it isn’t. It’s an attempt to undo the long-term effects of racism. Saying Affirmative Action is racist is like saying that (to bring us back to the present time) Katrina relief efforts are racist because they go disproportionately to blacks.

    Sure, by using a racist policy. It is the very definition of the term racism. I see where you are coming from. Racism and bigotry are only one directional.

  112. 112.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:16 pm

    Sometimes Joe Scarborough departs the Rove party line. Especially when he sees up close how people are hurt by the incompetence of this adminstration. don’t hold your breath though, he will soon enough be back blaming Democrats somehow for this whole thing.

  113. 113.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:17 pm

    So you’re saying the Swift Boat Liars for Orwellian Society were actually Democrats?

    The MoveOn ad doesn’t just disagree with Roberts on facts. It essentially blames his conservative civil rights views with black poverty and death in the floods. If you can’t see the difference, no one can help you.

    Max Cleland voluntarily had his image comflated with that of Osama bin Laden?

    Either you know that this is a lie, and you choose to spread it anyway, or you are ignorant of the facts. Cleland’s image was never morphed or conflated with Osama bin Laden’s.

  114. 114.

    Steve

    September 8, 2005 at 2:17 pm

    Most Democrats I know don’t think moveon.org speaks for them.

    But which is more egregious? Moveon.org holds no elective office.

    Tom Tancredo does.

    So where is the real stupidity here? It’s clearly in Tancredo’s corner.

  115. 115.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:17 pm

    Chimp? Enemies of normal Americans? Chimp?

  116. 116.

    Steve

    September 8, 2005 at 2:19 pm

    Champ Chimp writes:

    Cleland’s image was never morphed or conflated with Osama bin Laden’s.

    I believe this is called trying to win an argument on a technicality.

    It’s a well known fact that the Republicans ran ads with Bin Laden and Saddam’s image attacking Cleland. Whether or not Cleland’s image morphed into bin Laden is irrelevant.

  117. 117.

    Defense Guy

    September 8, 2005 at 2:20 pm

    I’d say Dean has more than his fair share of stupid moments. His advisors were right, he is just not ready for prime time.

  118. 118.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:21 pm

    CHIMP FACT CHECK

    The chimp said:

    or you are ignorant of the facts. Cleland’s image was never morphed or conflated with Osama bin Laden’s.

    When in fact:

    Cleland, 60, is still livid over a now-infamous TV commercial that Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss ran against him. It opened with pictures of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, then attacked Cleland for voting against President Bush’s Homeland Security bill. It didn’t mention that Cleland supported a Democratic bill that wasn’t radically different.

    “That was the biggest lie in America — to put me up there with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and say I voted against homeland security!” he says, his voice rising in anger.

    Chimp, still no comment on Gingrich calling Clinton supporters “enemies of normal Americans”?

  119. 119.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:23 pm

    how about Jesse Helms saying Pres. Clinton “better watch out” and “would need a bodyguard” if he came to N. Carolina. if calling for someone’s assassination isn’t hateful, I don’t know what is

    Helms didn’t “hate” Clinton, as we found out later, nor did he ever say so.

    It’s a terrible thing to say…but Helms wasn’t “calling for” Clinton’s “assassination” (or any bodily harm, for that matter), any more than the Dallas police chief “called for” Kennedy’s assassination by expressing his concerns for Kennedy’s safety. Clinton wasn’t president, yet, by the way, when Helms made his remark. It was a dumb remark, though.

  120. 120.

    Trent

    September 8, 2005 at 2:24 pm

    Helms didn’t “hate” Clinton, as we found out later, nor did he ever say so.

    I was right, wasn’t I? 15…

  121. 121.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:24 pm

    lol

  122. 122.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:27 pm

    Chimp? callin the supporters of Clinton “enemies of normal Americans”, does that fit your definition of a party offical expressing hatred?

    Nope. This was just some campaign rhetoric about framing who was for what. He never says he hates anyone.

    Do you understand that you can have political enemies, but not HATE them? Obviously, not — you are a true Deaniac. Hate away, dude!

  123. 123.

    sean

    September 8, 2005 at 2:27 pm

    he made the remark in November of 1994. Clinton was elected 2 years prior. try again.

  124. 124.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:28 pm

    Ok Chimp I’ll leave you alone if you just go away with your nonesense. Its just too easy demonstrating what a moron partisan you are. Like pulling the wings off of a butterfly. Go, lick your wounds and try not to issue challenges unless you are very sure you are right. Which you weren’t. adios friend.

  125. 125.

    Big E

    September 8, 2005 at 2:30 pm

    Champ Chelsea:
    re: Cleland’s image was never morphed or conflated with Osama bin Laden’s.

    Are you actually saying that you don’t believe the intent of that ad was to paint Cleland as a supporter of the terrorists and Bin Laden because he was not supporting the presidents ‘version’ of the homeland security bill?

  126. 126.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:31 pm

    He never says he hates anyone.

    Oh, so the criteria is that the ‘public offical’ has to specifically say he “hates” them. does he have to be in the same building Dean said it in too? On the same day of the week perhaps?

    Now if newt doesnt’ HATE the enemies of normal americans my question is why not? Sounds like one should hate the enemies of normal americans. In that one sentence he said that Democrats were enemeis… and not normal… but its the freakin Dems that are the party of hate….lol…..

  127. 127.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:33 pm

    Hey, Champ, you’re the one who claims the GOP isn’t a bastion of hate despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Enjoy stewing in your own ideological juices. I’m enjoying watching it. You’re a pretty funny guy.

    Overwhelming evidence, me ass.

    Howard Dean: “I hate Republicans.”

    And you guys, try as you might, reaching as far as you can reach, going as far back as you like, can’t come up with a Republican Party Official or Elected official or dogcatcher saying they hate any of their political enemies. But there we have the Chair of teh Democratic Party saying he “hates” the other side.

    So, who’s the Party of Hate? Who has drunk the Kool-Aid? As usual, your posts are only good for the irony.

  128. 128.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:38 pm

    Someone earlier was bringing up Cheney’s “go fuck yourself” comment to Senator Leahey. Well, payback is a bitch. Seems like some local said exactly the same thing to Cheney today. Here’s the video. I have a dial up so I haven’t seen it so when someone does.. please let me know how it went down.

  129. 129.

    SeesThroughIt

    September 8, 2005 at 2:39 pm

    Quick show of hands: Who thinks Champ is more entertaining than DougJ? I don’t think he’s got the breadth of a DougJ, but he’s fun to watch.

    By the way, where the hell is DougJ, anyway? Maybe we need another creationism post to draw him out.

  130. 130.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:42 pm

    It’s a well known fact that the Republicans ran ads with Bin Laden and Saddam’s image attacking Cleland.

    It’s a crime to have multiple pictures in an ad?? Now I’ve heard everything. Look at the ad.

    Then tell me if Cleland’s image was “conflated” with Saddam’s or OBL’s. It wasn’t. It’s a standard-issue campaign ad, and all the whining hype is sore losing.

    I’ll accept your apologies.

  131. 131.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:45 pm

    someone posted a transcript (sorta) of Cheney’s disaster visit today. It went something like this:

    Here is your transcript:

    Cheney:
    “Talking points, talking points, talking points.”

    Dude in the Background:
    “Fvck you Cheney!”

    Cheney:
    “Talking points, talking points, talking points.”

    Dude in the Background:
    “That’s right, fvck you Cheney!”

    Cheney:
    “That must be a friend of John errrr. Talking points, talking points, talking points.”

    CNN Reporter:
    “Do you get a lot of that lately Mr. Cheney?”

    Cheney:
    “Talking points, talking points, talking points.”

    Cheney Stooges:
    “Haha haha haha”

    Cheney:
    “Talking points, talking points, talking points.”

    .

  132. 132.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:45 pm

    Quick show of hands: Who thinks Champ is more entertaining than DougJ? I don’t think he’s got the breadth of a DougJ, but he’s fun to watch.

    If lame ridicule is all you’ve got (as opposed to that evidence of GOP “hate”), seesthroughit, then you’re adding nothing. Save the bandwidth.

  133. 133.

    sean

    September 8, 2005 at 2:46 pm

    Champ –
    was Clinton president in 1994?

  134. 134.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:46 pm

    he made the remark in November of 1994. Clinton was elected 2 years prior. try again.

    My bad. I thought it was 1990.

    See how easy it is to admit when you are wrong, guys? It’s what adults do.

  135. 135.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:47 pm

    Suggestion: ignore the CHIMP.

  136. 136.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:49 pm

    Howard Dean:

    I don’t hate Republicans as individuals. But I hate what the Republicans are doing to this country. I really do.

    So do I.

  137. 137.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:49 pm

    Oh, so the criteria is that the ‘public offical’ has to specifically say he “hates” them.

    Only if you want to prove it. I mean, I refuse to accept your “I can see into his soul because I’m so smart” argument. Call me a skeptic.

    does he have to be in the same building Dean said it in too? On the same day of the week perhaps?

    No, those are irrelevant to whether a person hates someone.

    Now if newt doesnt’ HATE the enemies of normal americans my question is why not? Sounds like one should hate the enemies of normal americans.

    That’s where the Democrats are wrong. You shouldn’t hate ANYONE.

  138. 138.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:52 pm

    I don’t hate Republicans as individuals. But I hate what the Republicans are doing to this country. I really do.

    Lame backtracking when the DNC told him he had to retract, just like his lame, illogical retractions to his “never worked a day in their lives” remark. We heard what he said: “I hate Republicans, and everything they stand for.” If he only meant the LAST part, why’d he say the first part?

  139. 139.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 2:56 pm

    Suggestion: ignore the CHIMP.

    Your juvenile namecalling makes your points all the more salient!

  140. 140.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 2:58 pm

    chimp unbelievably said:

    You shouldn’t hate ANYONE.

    You don’t hate Osama Bin Laden? What are you some fuckin terrorist? Why do you support Osama Bin laden? Dont’ you know he killed 3,000 americans? So do you give money to Osama? Do you want to hold hands with him and do therapy? You are a TRAITOR to your country. An apologists for terrorism. God you make me sick.

    See how easy it is to be a republican.

  141. 141.

    slide

    September 8, 2005 at 3:08 pm

    still waiting for John Cole to call for the firing of Michael Brown. The evidence of his incompetence keeps growing. This from Andrew Sullivan (Cole’s favorite blogger):

    CRONYISM AT ITS WORST: Don’t miss Paul Campos’ review of Michael Brown’s career at TNR. Money quote:

    When Brown left the IAHA four years ago, he was, among other things, a failed former lawyer – a man with a 20-year-old degree from a semi-accredited law school who hadn’t attempted to practice law in a serious way in nearly 15 years and who had just been forced out of his job in the wake of charges of impropriety. At this point in his life, returning to his long-abandoned legal career would have been very difficult in the competitive Colorado legal market. Yet, within months of leaving the IAHA, he was handed one of the top legal positions in the entire federal government: general counsel for a major federal agency. A year later, he was made its number-two official, and, a year after that, Bush appointed him director of FEMA.

    In normal times, appointing this kind of unqualified political hack to an agency with direct responsibility for saving lives is reckless. After 9/11, it is an incomprehensible failure.

    And this from the Florida Sun Sentinel calling his firing LAST YEAR:

    [N]othing can restore FEMA’s full functionality so long as the agency’s incompetent director, Michael Brown, remains at the helm. Brown, a patronage appointee with no previous disaster management experience, embarrassed himself last year with his attempts to justify FEMA’s waste of more than $31 million in hurricane relief given to areas not affected by a hurricane. After a South Florida Sun-Sentinel investigation exposed the waste, the newspaper called for Brown to be fired. It now repeats that call.

    .

  142. 142.

    Ken

    September 8, 2005 at 3:26 pm

    “Interestingly, the White House is now claiming that Katrina makes it necessary to privatize Social Security.”

    And the specific form of this claim:

    “[White House spokesman Trent] Duffy asserted that the vast spending that would be required to address the hurricane’s impact adds to the need to change Social Security, which threatens to strain the budget in coming years.”

    And I guess the Democratic tendency to greet every single bad thing that happens with a call to repeal the tax cuts doesn’t count as “politicizing” those bad things?

    Two billion dollars per day isn’t going to fall from the sky. Why is limiting the growth of Social Security payouts completely beyond the pale to even suggest as a response, but tax increases and deficit spending are not?

    “Tancredi in his statement advocates stopping relief efforts until a bi-partisan commitee is created. He says further down in the article , ” I hope the House will refrain from directly appropriating any funds . . . to either the state of Louisiana or the city of New Orleans,”.

    So his theory seems to be, let’s wait, form a committee and not worry about people who need assistance right now. He further states in the article that NOLA has a ‘long history of corruption’ and that the current Democratic officials “demonstrated mind-boggling incompetence in their lack of planning for and response to this disaster.” Even if you accept his reasoning, (which I do not) Tancredi still wants to stop aid until a committee decides what to do.
    Tancredi in the article is not very critical of efforts by FEMA, just a case of, ‘bureaucratic ineptitude’. Hmmm”

    And he’s right – there’s no comparison between the corruption and incompetence in Louisiana government (particularly New Orleans) and that found in the Federal government. Anyone who’s spent any time at all in Louisiana would know that sending money to a Louisiana government is slightly less effective than setting it on fire.

  143. 143.

    p.lukasiak

    September 8, 2005 at 3:50 pm

    My bad. I thought it was 1990.

    anyone STUPID enough to think Clinton was elected in 1990 really does deserve to be ignored…

  144. 144.

    p.lukasiak

    September 8, 2005 at 3:53 pm

    Why is limiting the growth of Social Security payouts completely beyond the pale to even suggest as a response, but tax increases and deficit spending are not?

    because Social Security has a TRUST FUND that we have been paying into for years, based upon a specificied payout schedule for when I retire. Those payouts will not be from general revenues, but from the redemption of federal notes held by the Social Security trust.

    Like most wingnuts, you want to steal a nice big chunk of people’s retirement security to keep from PAYING AS YOU GO FOR THE MONEY THE GOVERNMENT IS SPENDING TODAY. Well, keep your greedy paws OFF of my Social Security, scumbag.

  145. 145.

    goonie bird

    September 8, 2005 at 3:58 pm

    And i suppose that those at moron.org will balme bush along with the jerks at GREENPEACE and the other eco-wackos? i mean these idiots at GREENPEACE tried to blame last years tsunami on global warming just how stupid is GREENPEACE

  146. 146.

    Kimmitt

    September 8, 2005 at 3:59 pm

    The point was that you’ll never see a GOP-supported ad like the abominable one MoveOn had produced

    …which apparently never existed. Also, the GOP knows better; it doesn’t put out TV ads which have accountability, it starts whispering campaigns about its opponents’ out-of-wedlock mixed-race children.

  147. 147.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 4:05 pm

    anyone STUPID enough to think Clinton was elected in 1990 really does deserve to be ignored…

    I thought the QUOTE was from 1990, you jackass. When you have a point, I’ll let you know.

  148. 148.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 4:08 pm

    …which apparently never existed.

    So they planned to run an ad that never existed on Monday? From what I gather, the ad probably was produced, but the airing was rightfully cancelled.

    Also, the GOP knows better; it doesn’t put out TV ads which have accountability, it starts whispering campaigns about its opponents’ out-of-wedlock mixed-race children.

    No, they only do that to their own (if that meme is to be believed).

  149. 149.

    capelza

    September 8, 2005 at 4:16 pm

    So is Tancredo calling for federal oversight for the Sugarland district of Texas, because of the corruption? I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself…just read about the indictment of more of Delay’s buddies…

    Now, is the MoveOn.org ad real or a web willo-the -wisp?

  150. 150.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    Champ Chelsea, you’re right that is TRULY OFFENSIVE for MoveOn to be doing this. What people don’t understand is that just because president Bush hasn’t toured any black areas on the Gulf Coast, it isn’t because he doesn’t like black people. He has many black friends, including M.C. Hammer, former Steelers great Lynn Swan, columnist Anderson Williams, and former congressman Bob Barr of Georgia. It’s just that they couldn’t be sure the black area of New Orleans would be safe. There have been reports of looting and snipers. He wanted to go, it’s actually just that Secret Service wouldn’t let him.

    This is no time for the blame game. And most of the blame should be heaped on the state and local officials. Though, really no one — including them — anticipated that the levees would break. And it was only a category 1 storm a few weeks ago, so maybe we shouldn’t blame anyone. I’m tired of the partisan sniping.

  151. 151.

    Demdude

    September 8, 2005 at 5:02 pm

    Bob Barr of Georgia. is black? Don’t think so dude.

  152. 152.

    SeesThroughIt

    September 8, 2005 at 5:19 pm

    The racial aspects of Bush’s response. The major paragraphs (emphasis mine):

    Because they don’t see blacks as a current or potential constituency, Bush and his fellow Republicans do not respond out of the instinct of self-interest when dealing with their concerns. Helping low-income blacks is a matter of charity to them, not necessity. The condescension in their attitude intensifies when it comes to New Orleans, which is 67 percent black and largely irrelevant to GOP political ambitions. Cities with large African-American population that happen to be in important swing states may command some of Karl Rove’s respect as election time approaches. But Louisiana is small (9 electoral votes) and not much of a swinger these days. In 2004, Bush carried it by a 57-42 margin. If Bush and Rove didn’t experience the spontaneous political reflex to help New Orleans, it may be because they don’t think of New Orleans as a place that helps them.

    Further down:

    Had the residents of New Orleans been white Republicans in a state that mattered politically, instead of poor blacks in city that didn’t, Bush’s response surely would have been different. Compare what happened when hurricanes Charley and Frances hit Florida in 2004. Though the damage from those storms was negligible in relation to Katrina’s, the reaction from the White House was instinctive, rapid, and generous to the point of profligacy. Bush visited hurricane victims four times in six weeks and delivered relief checks personally. Michael Brown of FEMA, now widely regarded as an incompetent political hack, was so responsive that local officials praised the agency’s performance.

    The kind of constituency politics that results in a big life-preserver for whites in Florida and a tiny one for blacks in Louisiana may not be racist by design or intent. But the inevitable result is clear racial discrimination. It won’t change when Republicans care more about blacks. It will change when they have more reason to care.

    Kanye West was right: George Bush doesn’t care about black people–and he doesn’t care because politically speaking, he has no reason to. Remember, he refers to the “haves and have-mores” as “my base.” Poor people with dark skin don’t really register to him.

  153. 153.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 5:24 pm

    What people don’t understand is that just because president Bush hasn’t toured any black areas on the Gulf Coast

    Sorry, we’ve all seen the pictures of Bush with his arm around the two black girls, Fake Doug.

  154. 154.

    Champ Chelsea

    September 8, 2005 at 5:31 pm

    If you can’t believe an editorial from Slate, who can you believe?

    There’s no black people in Florida.

    A hurricane is the same as a flooded city.

    Bush spent more time and money on Florida than he will on Louisiana.

    When these are all proved wrong, will we get a retraction from this writer? LOL — just kidding. I already know the answer.

  155. 155.

    Rocky Smith

    September 8, 2005 at 5:53 pm

    Democrats have controlled NO and Louisiana for many decades. Why isn’t it a liberal paradise by now? Why are there still poor African Americans there? Must be from powerful Black hating Republicans, huh? I don’t buy the Bush hates blacks and wants to leave them to die arguement. Was the Federal Government quick to respond? Nope. Bush has explaining to do there. So does Louisiana’s Governor. The Red Cross had food and water ready for the Superfdome and the convention center, but the Gov. didn’t want more people to be lured there so she stopped delivery. A lot of people have some explaining to do.

  156. 156.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 6:01 pm

    Bob Barr of Georgia. is black? Don’t think so dude.

    Look again.

    I have a friend at the NAACP who told me they send him solicitation material every year.

  157. 157.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 6:02 pm

    A hurricane is the same as a flooded city.

    Huh? Are they both the same as a volcano or an earthquake as well.

  158. 158.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 6:05 pm

    Sorry, we’ve all seen the pictures of Bush with his arm around the two black girls, Fake Doug.

    You win, Champ. He stood by playing the guitar and eating cake while perhaps 10,000 African-Americans died, but he put his arm around two black girls, so he’s really a great humanitarian.

  159. 159.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 6:05 pm

    Sorry, we’ve all seen the pictures of Bush with his arm around the two black girls, Fake Doug.

    You win, Champ. He stood by playing the guitar and eating cake while perhaps 10,000 African-Americans died, but he put his arm around two black girls, so he’s really a great humanitarian.

  160. 160.

    capelza

    September 8, 2005 at 7:42 pm

    Okay folks, let us not forget Barbour while we’re castigating governors! (Just watched Joe Scarborough again..)

    Champ Chelsea Says:

    Fake Doug.

    Oh Snap!…or not.

  161. 161.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 7:51 pm

    Actually, capelza, what did Barbour do wrong exactly? I hear him being criticized but I’m not sure why. Sure, he’s spewed Karl Rove talking points on t.v., I know that, but we all gotta get paid, at least as far as federal relief is involved. What did he do wrong with relief services and evacuations?

  162. 162.

    DougJ

    September 8, 2005 at 7:51 pm

    Actually, capelza, what did Barbour do wrong exactly? I hear him being criticized but I’m not sure why. Sure, he’s spewed Karl Rove talking points on t.v., I know that, but we all gotta get paid, at least as far as federal relief is involved. What did he do wrong with relief services and evacuations?

  163. 163.

    capelza

    September 8, 2005 at 8:34 pm

    DougJ…we don’t hear that much about Barbour do we?

    I would refer you to any broadcast or statement from Joe Scarborough from the past several days for the short and sweet versions.

    But one thing that I find simply amazing is that a MS native would claim, as Barbour still does, that Katrina caught him by surprise, saying it was only a cat1 going across FL, even though as you, I and most of the country knew that AFTER that it grew to the Cat5 that was bearing down on his and the other states in his region…

  164. 164.

    jobiuspublius

    September 8, 2005 at 8:39 pm

    Rocky Smith Says:
    Democrats have controlled NO and Louisiana for many decades. Why isn’t it a liberal paradise by now? Why are there still poor African Americans there? Must be from powerful Black hating Republicans, huh?

    If what you say imply is true, then, maybe they didn’t get the memo from Strom.

    So does Louisiana’s Governor. The Red Cross had food and water ready for the Superfdome and the convention center, but the Gov. didn’t want more people to be lured there so she stopped delivery. A lot of people have some explaining to do.

    Maybe she was told by others that she better not allow those people into their neighborhoods. Or, maybe she was afraid that she didn’t have the resurces to take care of people AND maintain order at the same time. LA only had ~1/3rd of there Nat Guard. I don’t know. Either way, I’m not pleased.

  165. 165.

    Mac Buckets

    September 8, 2005 at 9:54 pm

    Look again.

    I have a friend at the NAACP who told me they send him solicitation material every year.

    Bob Barr?

    Whitest. “Black.” Ever.

  166. 166.

    Beej

    September 9, 2005 at 2:14 am

    Champ, you’re right. You really shouldn’t say you HATE anyone, not if you want to get elected. Do Republican officials ever say they hate anyone? Not in so many words. Some of their lunatic rightwing supporters do, but the party itself never, ever. Does the party align itself with the agenda of some of the haters? Yes, but not out of a like abhorrence. Their reasons have more to do with knowing what some of their base wants and playing to it. Cynical and self-serving it is, but hatred it is not. Notice, for example, that the Republicans have been playing to the right wing lunatic fringe for years, but what have they actually given the wingnuts? Very, very little. Abortion is still legal, government sanctioned prayer is still not allowed in public schools, evolution is still the standard for the biology curriculum (except in Kansas, and they’ve always been a little odd. Remember Carrie Nation?). The Republicans win elections because they make their policies sound REASONED. And believe it or not, that resonates with a majority of the voters. HATE is not reasonable. It scares the average voter. Bill Clinton became the first Democrat since Franklin Roosevelt to be elected to 2 full terms precisely because he appeared so REASONABLE. If you want to enact your policies, first you have to get elected. And you don’t get elected by screaming about how much you hate the other side.

  167. 167.

    Rocky Smith

    September 9, 2005 at 10:59 am

    “And you don’t get elected by screaming about how much you hate the other side.”

    Do the fine folks at Moveon.org know this?

  168. 168.

    Beej

    September 9, 2005 at 4:29 pm

    Apparently they don’t, Rocky.

  169. 169.

    Big E

    September 10, 2005 at 2:31 pm

    Ken:
    re: there’s no comparison between the corruption and incompetence in Louisiana government (particularly New Orleans) and that found in the Federal government.

    It’s good that you realize that the Bush administration is corrupt and incompetent….

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • John Revolta on Eve of Destuction (Jan 27, 2023 @ 6:30pm)
  • Stevie on Banned Book Drops (Open Thread) (Jan 27, 2023 @ 6:29pm)
  • Adam Lang on Eve of Destuction (Jan 27, 2023 @ 6:27pm)
  • H-Bob on Banned Book Drops (Open Thread) (Jan 27, 2023 @ 6:27pm)
  • Ihop on The Ballad of Nancy Hao (Jan 27, 2023 @ 6:26pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!