Sam Adams of the Los Angeles Times published yet another Elia Kazan apology on Nov. 7. 2010. Here's my response:
History is full of people who chose to show moral courage in the face of adversity. Unfortunately it is more full of those who show cowardice.
While it is true that Elia Kazan was a gifted director in the theatre and in the cinema, there is no doubt in my mind that he was one fairly despicable human being.
I love Martin Scorsese and I appreciate his scholarship and will not argue about his assessment of Kazan's career as a director. But I can not and will not ignore the man. Your piece puzzles me because it is so opinionated yet so flawed. It lacks perspective and seems blind to the truth, making me wonder the Sarah Palins of the world are winning.
Kazan was a guy who testified against others to protect his own skin. We have names for that and they are not kind. And yet you seem to hold him up as some hero. Where sir is your moral compass?
For me, there is no question that those who chose to betray others on the witness stands of the Senate and House UnAmerican activity committees are the moral equivalent of the French collaborators, the Norwegian quislings or the Dutch conspirators who turned Anne Frank's family into the Nazis. No different at all. Many people--my father among them--were confronted by these watershed tests of character and human decency. Some like my Dad behaved honorably. Others like Kazan, Budd Schulberg failed miserably.
I know it has become common practice of late for pop culture revisionist historians like Sam Tanenhaus to play the contrarian card, to make rapid fire declarations that are profoundly incorrect (e.g. "Conservatisim is Dead", anyone?) or simply cherry pick history to further their own personal and political agenda, (e.g. the Rosenbergs and McCarthy). But this revisionism, this attempt at resurrecting Kazan and his legacy by changing history--is both sad and deplorable.
I understand that Kazan and his friends had the PR machine working full-time. He was looking for the Oscar and to repair his image. It is sort of pathetic for me that writers like you fall for this.
Do you really think that Kazan chose to be a friendly witness because he was labeled a "foreman"? Yeah, name calling is really traumatic. You read this delusional excuse in his autobiography. And you believed it?
Hell even Wikipedia seems to have more of a clue: "in 1952 Kazan had handed over to the House Un-American Activities Committee the names of eight members of the Communist Party who had worked at the Group Theater where he had started as an actor. Naming names cost Kazan, himself a member of the party between 1934 and 1936 before resigning in protest, many friends in Hollywood and among US intellectuals. His reason for doing so after previously refusing to testify is still debated."
Kazan refused to testify at his first appearance before the HUAC but the second time he was called, Kazan capitulated, claiming it was because of his hatred of communism. So he names actors from his Group Theatre. What does that have to do with actors from the 1930s? I suspect in his own mind he thought he was mitigating the harm that he knew was about to be bestowed upon these people.
The FBI undoubtedly presented him with a difficult choice: "rat on your friends and we'll let you have a career or don't and suffer the consequences." I know this because the FBI played rough because of the pressure they put upon my own father and mother. And the FBI offered lots of enticements to rat out his peers. But my father--a flawed human being for sure--showed moral courage and instead offered only half the peace sign.
Those who named names did so in a variety of ways. Jerome Robbins named some friends who name him back. Others pointed the finger at old friends and acquaintances without a thought. Careers and lives were destroyed. Some like Lee J. Cobb and Sterling Hayden apologized for their transgressions. My father who suffered through 11 years of struggle was a forgiving man. I am less so.
Gerald Peary writing in the Boston Phoenix described Kazan's testimony as "odious pages and pages of careerist butt kissing and flag waving, Kazan going through the plots of each of his movies, explaining laboriously why they were very anti-Communist and (coming from an immigrant lad from Greece) very, very pro-American. And he named names to HUAC. Lots and lots of them. Kazan betrayed his ex-friends which guaranteed his continued employment in Hollywood. While they struggled, he, the informer, continued to work.
And you seem to think that is ok. Where is your moral compass?
You write that "On The Waterfront" written by fellow collaborator Budd Schulberg has often been read "with no small degree of contortion" as an apologia for Kazan's testimony. The snarkiness of that comment is only exceeded by its absurdity. Brando's character testifies to congressional investigators and is the hero. Are you really suggesting that Kazan and Schulberg were not trying to make their own testimony as heroic as Terry Malloy's to justify their treachery? You call that a contortion?
Your conclusions are the only contortions here.
I have no problem with reviews of Kazan's movies on dvd or elsewhere. But if you are going to weigh in on the politics, get it right and spare us the revised, adulterated and untruthful history.
The truth is what matters. Per Daniel Moynihan, you are entitled to your opinion, just not your own set of facts.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Obama Will Triumph -- So Will America
I don't normally cut and past. But he simply said it better than I could.
Michael
By Frank Schaeffer
Before he'd served even one year President Obama lost the support
of the easily distracted left and engendered the white hot rage of
the hate-filled right. But some of us, from all walks of life and
ideological backgrounds -- including this white, straight, 57-year-
old, former religious right wing agitator, now progressive writer
and (given my background as the son of a famous evangelical leader)
this unlikely Obama supporter -- are sticking with our President.
Why?-- because he is succeeding.
We faithful Obama supporters still trust our initial impression of
him as a great, good and uniquely qualified man to lead us.
Obama's steady supporters will be proved right. Obama's critics
will be remembered as easily panicked and prematurely discouraged
at best and shriveled hate mongers at worst.
The Context of the Obama Presidency
Not since the days of the rise of fascism in Europe , the Second
World War and the Depression has any president faced more
adversity. Not since the Civil War has any president led a more
bitterly divided country. Not since the introduction of racial
integration has any president faced a more consistently short-
sighted and willfully ignorant opposition - from both the right
and left.
As the President's poll numbers have fallen so has his support from
some on the left that were hailing him as a Messiah not long ago;
all those lefty websites and commentators that were falling all
over themselves on behalf of our first black president during the
2008 election.
The left's lack of faith has become a self-fulfilling "prophecy"--
snipe at the President and then watch the poll numbers fall and
then pretend you didn't have anything to do with it!
Here is what Obama faced when he took office-- none of which was
his fault:
# An ideologically divided country to the point that America was
really two countries
# Two wars; one that was mishandled from the start, the other that
was unnecessary and immoral
# The worst economic crisis since the depression
# America 's standing in the world at the lowest point in history
# A country that had been misled into accepting the use of torture
of prisoners of war
# A health care system in free fall
# An educational system in free fall
# A global environmental crisis of history-altering proportions
(about which the Bush administration and the Republicans had done
nothing)
# An impasse between culture warriors from the right and left
# A huge financial deficit inherited from the terminally
irresponsible Bush administration.
And those were only some of the problems sitting on the
President's desk!
"Help" from the Right?
What did the Republicans and the religious right, libertarians and
half-baked conspiracy theorists -- that is what the Republicans
were reduced to by the time Obama took office -- do to "help" our
new president (and our country) succeed? They claimed that he
wasn't a real American, didn't have an American birth certificate,
wasn't born here, was secretly a Muslim, was white-hating "racist",
was secretly a communist, was actually the Anti-Christ, (!) and was
a reincarnation of Hitler and wanted "death panels" to kill the
elderly!
They not-so-subtly called for his assassination through the not-so-
subtle use of vile signs held at their rallies and even a bumper
sticker quoting Psalm 109:8. They organized "tea parties" to sound
off against imagined insults and all government in general and
gathered to howl at the moon. They were led by insurance industry
lobbyists and deranged (but well financed) "commentators" from
Glenn Beck to Rush Limbaugh.
The utterly discredited Roman Catholic bishops teamed up with the
utterly discredited evangelical leaders to denounce a president who
was trying to actually do something about the poor, the
environment, to diminish the number of abortions through
compassionate programs to help women and to care for the sick! And
in Congress the Republican leadership only knew one word: "No!"
In other words the reactionary white, rube, uneducated, crazy
American far right,combined with the educated but obtuse
neoconservative war mongers, religious right shills for big
business, libertarian Fed Reserve-hating gold bug, gun-loving
crazies, child-molesting acquiescent "bishops", frontier loons and
evangelical gay-hating flakes found one thing to briefly unite
them: their desire to stop an uppity black man from succeeding at
all costs!
"Help" from the Left?
What did the left do to help their newly elected president? Some of
them excoriated the President because they disagreed with the bad
choices he was being forced to make regarding a war in Afghanistan
that he'd inherited from the worst president in modern history!
Others stood up and bravely proclaimed that the President's
economic policies had "failed" before the President even instituted
them! Others said that since all gay rights battles had not been
fully won within virtually minutes of the President taking office,
they'd been "betrayed"! (Never mind that Obama's vocal support to
the gay community is stronger than any other president's has been.
Never mind that he signed a new hate crimes law!)
Those that had stood in transfixed legions weeping with beatific
emotion on election night turned into an angry mob saying how
"disappointed" they were that they'd not all immediately been
translated to heaven the moment Obama stepped into the White House!
Where was the "change"? Contrary to their expectations they were
still mere mortals!
And the legion of young new supporters was too busy texting to pay
attention for longer than a nanosecond. "Governing"?! What the hell
does that word, uh, like mean?"
The President's critics left and right all had one thing in common:
impatience laced with little-to-no sense of history (let alone
reality) thrown in for good measure. Then of course there were the
white, snide know-it-all commentators/talking heads who just
couldn't imagine that maybe, just maybe they weren't as smart as
they thought they were and certainly not as smart as their
president. He hadn't consulted them, had he? So he must be wrong!
The Obama critics' ideological ideas defined their idea of reality
rather than reality defining their ideas-say, about what is
possible in one year in office after the hand that the President
had been dealt by fate, or to be exact by the American idiot nation
that voted Bush into office. twice!
Meanwhile back in the reality-based community - in just 12 short
months -- President Obama:
#Continued to draw down the misbegotten war in Iraq
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Thoughtfully and decisively picked the best of several bad choices
regarding the war in Afghanistan
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Gave a major precedent-setting speech supporting gay rights
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Restored America 's image around the globe
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Banned torture of American prisoners
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Stopped the free fall of the American economy
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Put the USA squarely back in the bilateral international community
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Put the USA squarely into the middle of the international effort
to halt global warming
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Stood up for educational reform
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Won a Nobel peace prize
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Moved the trial of terrorists back into the American judicial
system of checks and balances
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Did what had to be done to start the slow, torturous and almost
impossible process of health care reform that 7 presidents had
failed to even begin
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Responded to hatred from the right and left with measured good
humor and patience
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Stopped the free fall of job losses
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Showed immense personal courage in the face of an armed and
dangerous far right opposition that included the sort of disgusting
people that show up at public meetings carrying loaded weapons and
carrying Timothy McVeigh-inspired signs about the "blood of
tyrants" needing to "water the tree of liberty".
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Showed that he could not only make the tough military choices but
explain and defend them brilliantly
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
Other than those "disappointing" accomplishments -- IN ONE YEAR --
President Obama "failed"! Other than that he didn't "live up to
expectations"!
Who actually has failed...
...are the Americans that can't see the beginning of a miracle of
national rebirth right under their jaded noses. Who failed are the
smart ass ideologues of the left and right who began rooting for
this President to fail so that they could be proved right in their
dire and morbid predictions. Who failed are the movers and shakers
behind our obscenely dumb news cycles that have turned "news" into
just more stupid entertainment for an entertainment-besotted
infantile country.
Here's the good news: President Obama is succeeding without the
help of his lefty "supporters" or hate-filled Republican detractors!
The Future Looks Good
After Obama has served two full terms, (and he will), after his
wisdom in moving deliberately and cautiously with great subtlety on
all fronts -- with a canny and calculating eye to the possible
succeeds, (it will), after the economy is booming and new industries
are burgeoning, (they will be), after the doomsayers are all proved
not just wrong but silly: let the record show that not all
Americans were panicked into thinking the sky was falling.
Just because we didn't get everything we wanted in the first short
and fraught year Obama was in office not all of us gave up. Some of
us stayed the course. And we will be proved right.
Michael
By Frank Schaeffer
Before he'd served even one year President Obama lost the support
of the easily distracted left and engendered the white hot rage of
the hate-filled right. But some of us, from all walks of life and
ideological backgrounds -- including this white, straight, 57-year-
old, former religious right wing agitator, now progressive writer
and (given my background as the son of a famous evangelical leader)
this unlikely Obama supporter -- are sticking with our President.
Why?-- because he is succeeding.
We faithful Obama supporters still trust our initial impression of
him as a great, good and uniquely qualified man to lead us.
Obama's steady supporters will be proved right. Obama's critics
will be remembered as easily panicked and prematurely discouraged
at best and shriveled hate mongers at worst.
The Context of the Obama Presidency
Not since the days of the rise of fascism in Europe , the Second
World War and the Depression has any president faced more
adversity. Not since the Civil War has any president led a more
bitterly divided country. Not since the introduction of racial
integration has any president faced a more consistently short-
sighted and willfully ignorant opposition - from both the right
and left.
As the President's poll numbers have fallen so has his support from
some on the left that were hailing him as a Messiah not long ago;
all those lefty websites and commentators that were falling all
over themselves on behalf of our first black president during the
2008 election.
The left's lack of faith has become a self-fulfilling "prophecy"--
snipe at the President and then watch the poll numbers fall and
then pretend you didn't have anything to do with it!
Here is what Obama faced when he took office-- none of which was
his fault:
# An ideologically divided country to the point that America was
really two countries
# Two wars; one that was mishandled from the start, the other that
was unnecessary and immoral
# The worst economic crisis since the depression
# America 's standing in the world at the lowest point in history
# A country that had been misled into accepting the use of torture
of prisoners of war
# A health care system in free fall
# An educational system in free fall
# A global environmental crisis of history-altering proportions
(about which the Bush administration and the Republicans had done
nothing)
# An impasse between culture warriors from the right and left
# A huge financial deficit inherited from the terminally
irresponsible Bush administration.
And those were only some of the problems sitting on the
President's desk!
"Help" from the Right?
What did the Republicans and the religious right, libertarians and
half-baked conspiracy theorists -- that is what the Republicans
were reduced to by the time Obama took office -- do to "help" our
new president (and our country) succeed? They claimed that he
wasn't a real American, didn't have an American birth certificate,
wasn't born here, was secretly a Muslim, was white-hating "racist",
was secretly a communist, was actually the Anti-Christ, (!) and was
a reincarnation of Hitler and wanted "death panels" to kill the
elderly!
They not-so-subtly called for his assassination through the not-so-
subtle use of vile signs held at their rallies and even a bumper
sticker quoting Psalm 109:8. They organized "tea parties" to sound
off against imagined insults and all government in general and
gathered to howl at the moon. They were led by insurance industry
lobbyists and deranged (but well financed) "commentators" from
Glenn Beck to Rush Limbaugh.
The utterly discredited Roman Catholic bishops teamed up with the
utterly discredited evangelical leaders to denounce a president who
was trying to actually do something about the poor, the
environment, to diminish the number of abortions through
compassionate programs to help women and to care for the sick! And
in Congress the Republican leadership only knew one word: "No!"
In other words the reactionary white, rube, uneducated, crazy
American far right,combined with the educated but obtuse
neoconservative war mongers, religious right shills for big
business, libertarian Fed Reserve-hating gold bug, gun-loving
crazies, child-molesting acquiescent "bishops", frontier loons and
evangelical gay-hating flakes found one thing to briefly unite
them: their desire to stop an uppity black man from succeeding at
all costs!
"Help" from the Left?
What did the left do to help their newly elected president? Some of
them excoriated the President because they disagreed with the bad
choices he was being forced to make regarding a war in Afghanistan
that he'd inherited from the worst president in modern history!
Others stood up and bravely proclaimed that the President's
economic policies had "failed" before the President even instituted
them! Others said that since all gay rights battles had not been
fully won within virtually minutes of the President taking office,
they'd been "betrayed"! (Never mind that Obama's vocal support to
the gay community is stronger than any other president's has been.
Never mind that he signed a new hate crimes law!)
Those that had stood in transfixed legions weeping with beatific
emotion on election night turned into an angry mob saying how
"disappointed" they were that they'd not all immediately been
translated to heaven the moment Obama stepped into the White House!
Where was the "change"? Contrary to their expectations they were
still mere mortals!
And the legion of young new supporters was too busy texting to pay
attention for longer than a nanosecond. "Governing"?! What the hell
does that word, uh, like mean?"
The President's critics left and right all had one thing in common:
impatience laced with little-to-no sense of history (let alone
reality) thrown in for good measure. Then of course there were the
white, snide know-it-all commentators/talking heads who just
couldn't imagine that maybe, just maybe they weren't as smart as
they thought they were and certainly not as smart as their
president. He hadn't consulted them, had he? So he must be wrong!
The Obama critics' ideological ideas defined their idea of reality
rather than reality defining their ideas-say, about what is
possible in one year in office after the hand that the President
had been dealt by fate, or to be exact by the American idiot nation
that voted Bush into office. twice!
Meanwhile back in the reality-based community - in just 12 short
months -- President Obama:
#Continued to draw down the misbegotten war in Iraq
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Thoughtfully and decisively picked the best of several bad choices
regarding the war in Afghanistan
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Gave a major precedent-setting speech supporting gay rights
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Restored America 's image around the globe
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Banned torture of American prisoners
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Stopped the free fall of the American economy
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Put the USA squarely back in the bilateral international community
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Put the USA squarely into the middle of the international effort
to halt global warming
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Stood up for educational reform
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Won a Nobel peace prize
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Moved the trial of terrorists back into the American judicial
system of checks and balances
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Did what had to be done to start the slow, torturous and almost
impossible process of health care reform that 7 presidents had
failed to even begin
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Responded to hatred from the right and left with measured good
humor and patience
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Stopped the free fall of job losses
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Showed immense personal courage in the face of an armed and
dangerous far right opposition that included the sort of disgusting
people that show up at public meetings carrying loaded weapons and
carrying Timothy McVeigh-inspired signs about the "blood of
tyrants" needing to "water the tree of liberty".
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
#Showed that he could not only make the tough military choices but
explain and defend them brilliantly
(But that wasn't good enough for his critics)
Other than those "disappointing" accomplishments -- IN ONE YEAR --
President Obama "failed"! Other than that he didn't "live up to
expectations"!
Who actually has failed...
...are the Americans that can't see the beginning of a miracle of
national rebirth right under their jaded noses. Who failed are the
smart ass ideologues of the left and right who began rooting for
this President to fail so that they could be proved right in their
dire and morbid predictions. Who failed are the movers and shakers
behind our obscenely dumb news cycles that have turned "news" into
just more stupid entertainment for an entertainment-besotted
infantile country.
Here's the good news: President Obama is succeeding without the
help of his lefty "supporters" or hate-filled Republican detractors!
The Future Looks Good
After Obama has served two full terms, (and he will), after his
wisdom in moving deliberately and cautiously with great subtlety on
all fronts -- with a canny and calculating eye to the possible
succeeds, (it will), after the economy is booming and new industries
are burgeoning, (they will be), after the doomsayers are all proved
not just wrong but silly: let the record show that not all
Americans were panicked into thinking the sky was falling.
Just because we didn't get everything we wanted in the first short
and fraught year Obama was in office not all of us gave up. Some of
us stayed the course. And we will be proved right.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
John McCain, maverick?
A lot of folks are wondering what happened to John's McCain's integrity as he veers right to combat the challenge from the right wing neanderthal JD Hayworth. I would argue McCain never had any. He's a party of one, looking out for himself. Like Bush Junior, he rode his father's coattails as long as possible. Yes he was a war hero but any other pilot with his record would not have been allowed to fly in the first place. He emerged from the war, dumped his wife, sucked up to the Reagans and began his political career. Yes he has displayed some willingness to buck the system but I suspect it was as much a calculation as anything else in his political career as he sought to resurrect his own image post Keating. When he had the opportunity to display real leadership--during the campaign and as the gracious defeated candidate concerned about his country--he didn't. He changed his positions with the political winds. And his stunningly inept selection of Sarah Palin demonstrates the analytical mind of a frat boy.
Finally: if you have to call yourself a maverick, you are not a maverick.
Finally: if you have to call yourself a maverick, you are not a maverick.
Marginalizing Obama...
I have some issues with President Obama but I am really tired of those who on the right try to marginalize Obama. They do so because they can not actually win a thoughtful debate on the subject. Like the wonderfully naive tea baggers (who you'd think would have changed the name by now), their anger is palpable but misguided. These guys get their "news" from Fox and the integrity-challenged Sean Hannity and other right wing nuts. They listen to the bloviator Rush Limbaugh, a junior college failure (yeah he FAILED junior college).
And honestly I find some of these comments, criticisms (socialist?) and ad hominem attacks intimate something far more ugly and disturbing about the accuser than Obama. But I digress...
We have Sarah Palin attacking President Obama. WTF?
Let's examine what I like to call this celebration of stupidity. On one hand we have a woman who took 6 years to graduate from the University of Idaho. who can't explain much less defend a simple foreign policy concept (Bush Doctrine), who thinks Africa is a country, who doesn't know there is a North and a South Korea and who thinks "What do you read?" is a trick question.
And then we have a Obama who earned his way through Columbia and Harvard Law (and Law Review as well making him on of the top students in his class) as opposed to Bush who was a legacy (they would take the village idiot and did).
Sorry but it is a no brainer for those willing to agitate their craniums.
Obama critics willfully ignore his record as President. Or they just don't bother to educate themselves, their hate being so irrational. So what has Obama really done?
Here's a very short list, cadged from several sources: he ordered Guantanamo closed. He signed a $790 billion stimulus package. He addressed the Muslim world directly in his Cairo speech. He addressed the matters of race somewhat remarkably with his WH beer summit. He made history by nominating Sotomayor to the very activist and conservative SC. He instituted enforcement for equal pay for women. He began the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. He ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information. He instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible. He put limits on lobbyist's access to the White House and on aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration. He ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date. He phased out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren't even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan. He removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research while increasing Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research. He prioritized infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect. He allocated funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools as well as new funds for school construction. And he put into place a US Auto industry rescue plan which helped both the economy as well as saving jobs.
Oh yeah, he won the Noble Peace Prize BECAUSE he preached diplomacy and discussion--two things conservative chicken hawks are afraid of-and because he restored US prestige around the world.
There's more but any rational person would acknowledge that the GOP attempts to kill health care have over shadowed some very serious achievement.
Obama did this despite the fact he inherited an economy in the toilet, huge debt and unregulated financial industry (thanks to both Reagan and Clinton).
Contrary to what these critics and windbags hear on Beck or Fox News, Obama's stimulus spending played only a minor role in expanding federal budget deficit. Many policies that pre-date the Obama Administration are key factors in the growing deficit. In fact much of the current deficit can be attributed to the previous administration’s policies. Nearly all federal spending in 2009, all federal taxes, are dictated by laws that were in effect before Obama took office. In short, what these conservative geniuses are railing against is a 2009 Federal budget put forth by Bush before he left office. So why are these folks attacking Obama for Bush's budget? For the same reason they blame Obama for the Bush Administration's inept bailout of Wall Street. They hope Americans will forget the timeline.
Like Reagan, Shrub left a legacy of mortgaging the future. There were two big-ticket Bush policies: tax cuts for the wealthy, which cost around $1.8 trillion plus interest in revenue; and the other being the Iraq War, which has cost at least $700 billion, and will cost more before we finally extract ourselves. And which we have yet to begin paying for!
So where were these self righteous Obama-haters-turned-deficit-hawks then? Why didn't they rail against a conservative economic policy doomed to fail which it did? Because they didn't understand it. Or they stood to profit from it. Or both. So excuse me if I don't take these folks and their opinions seriously. At all.
Facts are inconvenient things for conservatives these days. So save your breath. This country faces some daunting challenges. People can have varying points of view and still have a thoughtful yet civil discourse on very serious issues. But we are not getting it from Republicans or anyone else on the right.
And honestly I find some of these comments, criticisms (socialist?) and ad hominem attacks intimate something far more ugly and disturbing about the accuser than Obama. But I digress...
We have Sarah Palin attacking President Obama. WTF?
Let's examine what I like to call this celebration of stupidity. On one hand we have a woman who took 6 years to graduate from the University of Idaho. who can't explain much less defend a simple foreign policy concept (Bush Doctrine), who thinks Africa is a country, who doesn't know there is a North and a South Korea and who thinks "What do you read?" is a trick question.
And then we have a Obama who earned his way through Columbia and Harvard Law (and Law Review as well making him on of the top students in his class) as opposed to Bush who was a legacy (they would take the village idiot and did).
Sorry but it is a no brainer for those willing to agitate their craniums.
Obama critics willfully ignore his record as President. Or they just don't bother to educate themselves, their hate being so irrational. So what has Obama really done?
Here's a very short list, cadged from several sources: he ordered Guantanamo closed. He signed a $790 billion stimulus package. He addressed the Muslim world directly in his Cairo speech. He addressed the matters of race somewhat remarkably with his WH beer summit. He made history by nominating Sotomayor to the very activist and conservative SC. He instituted enforcement for equal pay for women. He began the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. He ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information. He instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible. He put limits on lobbyist's access to the White House and on aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration. He ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date. He phased out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren't even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan. He removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research while increasing Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research. He prioritized infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect. He allocated funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools as well as new funds for school construction. And he put into place a US Auto industry rescue plan which helped both the economy as well as saving jobs.
Oh yeah, he won the Noble Peace Prize BECAUSE he preached diplomacy and discussion--two things conservative chicken hawks are afraid of-and because he restored US prestige around the world.
There's more but any rational person would acknowledge that the GOP attempts to kill health care have over shadowed some very serious achievement.
Obama did this despite the fact he inherited an economy in the toilet, huge debt and unregulated financial industry (thanks to both Reagan and Clinton).
Contrary to what these critics and windbags hear on Beck or Fox News, Obama's stimulus spending played only a minor role in expanding federal budget deficit. Many policies that pre-date the Obama Administration are key factors in the growing deficit. In fact much of the current deficit can be attributed to the previous administration’s policies. Nearly all federal spending in 2009, all federal taxes, are dictated by laws that were in effect before Obama took office. In short, what these conservative geniuses are railing against is a 2009 Federal budget put forth by Bush before he left office. So why are these folks attacking Obama for Bush's budget? For the same reason they blame Obama for the Bush Administration's inept bailout of Wall Street. They hope Americans will forget the timeline.
Like Reagan, Shrub left a legacy of mortgaging the future. There were two big-ticket Bush policies: tax cuts for the wealthy, which cost around $1.8 trillion plus interest in revenue; and the other being the Iraq War, which has cost at least $700 billion, and will cost more before we finally extract ourselves. And which we have yet to begin paying for!
So where were these self righteous Obama-haters-turned-deficit-hawks then? Why didn't they rail against a conservative economic policy doomed to fail which it did? Because they didn't understand it. Or they stood to profit from it. Or both. So excuse me if I don't take these folks and their opinions seriously. At all.
Facts are inconvenient things for conservatives these days. So save your breath. This country faces some daunting challenges. People can have varying points of view and still have a thoughtful yet civil discourse on very serious issues. But we are not getting it from Republicans or anyone else on the right.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Letter to a Conservative Friend...
Sometimes it is best among friends not to discuss politics.
But to be clear, I just want my conservative friends to know that I stand polar opposite to those who choose to unfairly criticize or worse to marginalize President Obama from the political right.
Those who do so clearly do not understand the damage done to this country by the Bush presidency. Like may Americans capable of agitating their craniums, I know it, saw it and witnessed it first hand.
Much of this criticism is nonsense of course but it does have a particular racial component that can not go unnoticed. Conservatives accuse Obama who served two terms in the Illinois Legislature and was elected to US Senate as well as being a scholar and lecturer on constitutional law of being inexperienced yet they swoon at the thought of Sarah Palin who was mayor of a town of 5000 people and who served three years of her four year term as Governor of Alaska (the population of which is smaller than the island of Manhattan). These same people often question Obama's intellect (Occidental, Columbia, Harvard Law Review) while ignoring Palin's academic credentials (four colleges in six years to finish an undergraduate degree).
Conservatives charge Obama with arrogance but ignore the disastrous arrogance that marked the Bush Cheney years with their faux Cowboy diplomacy when America was universally disliked around the world. Nothing like two cowards (both men supported the Viet Nam war but found ways NOT to serve) playing GI Joe with real men and women...
9/11 happened on their watch and they were warned but they did nothing. They were warned twice: by the Hart-Rudman report and the August 6. 2001 National Security briefing.
Tax cuts for the rich and deregulation of the financial markets led to an economic shift in wealth away from the middle class towards the rich. Republicans are very good at winning elections claiming government is the problem, then they get elected and prove go about proving it.
And if this is a Christian nation why are so many acting in such a decidely unChristian-like way with the demonizing of immigrants, loyalty oaths and the irrational antagonism of health care reform which plays into the hands of insurance companies and pharmaceuticals?
We have a separation of church and state. It is in the Constitution. Unfortunately a lot of folks on the right side of the political aisle haven't bothered reading it. In fact Congressman Boehner of Ohio can't distinguish between it and the Bill of Rights.
I voted for Obama and I have to admit I'm a bit disappointed because I don't think he has gone FAR enough to erase the ugliness of the Bush years. The pendulum in my view needs to swing back even further.
The US is a great experiment in democracy but the pace is slow. Three steps forward; two steps back. And to be clear, the right wing of this country has never led the movement toward democracy in this country. Rather it always interferes whether it be on civil rights, women's rights, worker's rights, voter's rights, health care or whatever. I remind you that it was the political right that never supported social security, medicare, medicaid, voter's rights or integration.
America's demagogues have always come from the political right, whether it be Father Joseph Coughlin or Sen Joseph McCarthy. These clowns often cited the wonders of American democracy, then went about denying Americans the very rights and liberties that they supposedly hold so dearly.
Now we have the junior college failure Rush Limbaugh, the intellectually dishonest Sean Hannity (he who has to use fake footage on his newscast to make a point) and a host of other jackals attacking this administration before they even took office.
Your side, the political right, always stands opposed to these fundamental improvements in our democracy.
Look around you on your side of the political aisle. The disloyal opposition is a broad range of people, many of whom hold extreme positions on things like religion or race or are birthers or whatever. They threaten and berate.
They are also recipients of what Tim Wise called "white privilege". If you can find that essay I suggest you read it. For example, white privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was "Alaska first," and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and you forget to wear an American flag on your lapel or your spouse fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think that both of you are being disrespectful.
When I watch tea baggers or those attending anti health care reform rallies struggling to explain themselves, it is sad. For what I see in many cases is a triumph of ignorance and stupidity masking their own racism. When I hear a women crying that she wants her country back, I KNOW what she is really saying.
I should not be surprised. I look at the emergence of the laughably inept Sarah Palin, the continued criticism from the coward Dick Cheney and wonder what these people are thinking.
They aren't.
That is the biggest threat to our democracy: The celebration of stupidity. There is a lot of that going on over on your side of the political aisle.
I look forward to the day when the GOP has some real leadership: not a token black man, a closeted self-loathing Senator from Kentucky, the evangelical Jew from Virginia or the perpetually tanned Congressman from Ohio who doesn't know the difference between the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
This country needs a strong two party system. This GOP is a disaster.
One last thing: it was the political right who ran this country into the ground. Pardon me if I don't take their criticism of Obama too seriously. And pardon me if I give Obama the benefit of the doubt as he goes about trying to undo the damage leveled by the incompetent Bush/Cheney years.
But to be clear, I just want my conservative friends to know that I stand polar opposite to those who choose to unfairly criticize or worse to marginalize President Obama from the political right.
Those who do so clearly do not understand the damage done to this country by the Bush presidency. Like may Americans capable of agitating their craniums, I know it, saw it and witnessed it first hand.
Much of this criticism is nonsense of course but it does have a particular racial component that can not go unnoticed. Conservatives accuse Obama who served two terms in the Illinois Legislature and was elected to US Senate as well as being a scholar and lecturer on constitutional law of being inexperienced yet they swoon at the thought of Sarah Palin who was mayor of a town of 5000 people and who served three years of her four year term as Governor of Alaska (the population of which is smaller than the island of Manhattan). These same people often question Obama's intellect (Occidental, Columbia, Harvard Law Review) while ignoring Palin's academic credentials (four colleges in six years to finish an undergraduate degree).
Conservatives charge Obama with arrogance but ignore the disastrous arrogance that marked the Bush Cheney years with their faux Cowboy diplomacy when America was universally disliked around the world. Nothing like two cowards (both men supported the Viet Nam war but found ways NOT to serve) playing GI Joe with real men and women...
9/11 happened on their watch and they were warned but they did nothing. They were warned twice: by the Hart-Rudman report and the August 6. 2001 National Security briefing.
Tax cuts for the rich and deregulation of the financial markets led to an economic shift in wealth away from the middle class towards the rich. Republicans are very good at winning elections claiming government is the problem, then they get elected and prove go about proving it.
And if this is a Christian nation why are so many acting in such a decidely unChristian-like way with the demonizing of immigrants, loyalty oaths and the irrational antagonism of health care reform which plays into the hands of insurance companies and pharmaceuticals?
We have a separation of church and state. It is in the Constitution. Unfortunately a lot of folks on the right side of the political aisle haven't bothered reading it. In fact Congressman Boehner of Ohio can't distinguish between it and the Bill of Rights.
I voted for Obama and I have to admit I'm a bit disappointed because I don't think he has gone FAR enough to erase the ugliness of the Bush years. The pendulum in my view needs to swing back even further.
The US is a great experiment in democracy but the pace is slow. Three steps forward; two steps back. And to be clear, the right wing of this country has never led the movement toward democracy in this country. Rather it always interferes whether it be on civil rights, women's rights, worker's rights, voter's rights, health care or whatever. I remind you that it was the political right that never supported social security, medicare, medicaid, voter's rights or integration.
America's demagogues have always come from the political right, whether it be Father Joseph Coughlin or Sen Joseph McCarthy. These clowns often cited the wonders of American democracy, then went about denying Americans the very rights and liberties that they supposedly hold so dearly.
Now we have the junior college failure Rush Limbaugh, the intellectually dishonest Sean Hannity (he who has to use fake footage on his newscast to make a point) and a host of other jackals attacking this administration before they even took office.
Your side, the political right, always stands opposed to these fundamental improvements in our democracy.
Look around you on your side of the political aisle. The disloyal opposition is a broad range of people, many of whom hold extreme positions on things like religion or race or are birthers or whatever. They threaten and berate.
They are also recipients of what Tim Wise called "white privilege". If you can find that essay I suggest you read it. For example, white privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was "Alaska first," and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and you forget to wear an American flag on your lapel or your spouse fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think that both of you are being disrespectful.
When I watch tea baggers or those attending anti health care reform rallies struggling to explain themselves, it is sad. For what I see in many cases is a triumph of ignorance and stupidity masking their own racism. When I hear a women crying that she wants her country back, I KNOW what she is really saying.
I should not be surprised. I look at the emergence of the laughably inept Sarah Palin, the continued criticism from the coward Dick Cheney and wonder what these people are thinking.
They aren't.
That is the biggest threat to our democracy: The celebration of stupidity. There is a lot of that going on over on your side of the political aisle.
I look forward to the day when the GOP has some real leadership: not a token black man, a closeted self-loathing Senator from Kentucky, the evangelical Jew from Virginia or the perpetually tanned Congressman from Ohio who doesn't know the difference between the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
This country needs a strong two party system. This GOP is a disaster.
One last thing: it was the political right who ran this country into the ground. Pardon me if I don't take their criticism of Obama too seriously. And pardon me if I give Obama the benefit of the doubt as he goes about trying to undo the damage leveled by the incompetent Bush/Cheney years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)