faboo mama

I just read Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on Ferraro’s remarks. Some highlights:

And when this despicable statement — ugly in its overtones, laughable in its weak grip of facts, and moronic in the historical context — when it floats outward from the Clinton Campaign like a poison cloud, what do the advisors have their candidate do?

Do they have Senator Clinton herself compare the remark to Al Campanis talking on Nightline… on Jackie Robinson day… about how blacks lacked the necessities to become baseball executives, while she points out that Barock Obama has not gotten his 1600 delegates as part of some kind of Affirmative Action plan?
[snip]

No.
Somebody tells her that simply disagreeing with and rejecting the remarks is sufficient.
And she should then call, “regrettable”, words that should make any Democrat retch.
And that she should then try to twist them, first into some pox-on-both-your-houses plea to ’stick to the issues,’ and then to let her campaign manager try to bend them beyond all recognition, into Senator Obama’s fault.
And thus these advisers give Congresswoman Ferraro nearly a week in which to send Senator Clinton’s campaign back into the vocabulary… of David Duke.

“Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let’s address reality and the problems we’re facing in this world, you’re accused of being racist, so you have to shut up.
“Racism works in two different directions. I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white.
“How’s that?”

And…

This, Senator Clinton, is your campaign, and it is your name.
Grab the reins back from whoever has led you to this precipice, before it is too late.
Voluntarily or inadvertently, you are still awash in this filth.
Your only reaction has been to disagree, reject, and to call it regrettable.
Her only reaction has been to brand herself as the victim, resign from your committee, and insist she will continue to speak.
Unless you say something definitive, Senator, the former Congresswoman is speaking with your approval.
You must remedy this.
And you must… reject… and denounce… Geraldine Ferraro.

Yay. Keith spoke up. Rockin’!

Yet, as I read this I got pissed. Not only does it echo my previous post, but this little rant is bullshit, in that the media is complicit. As I posted to the New Hole “blog”:

Now, if only the other chatterboxes at MSNBC could see this point. I get that you all are about ratings and this drama only bumps them, but there should be repercussions. Schuster says something stupid and he’s suspended for two weeks. Buchanan says something stupid/racist almost every other time he’s on the air and he hasn’t beensuspended.

I get indignation. I get this. Heck, I posted something similar on my own blog earlier today…but it’s a little hard to take when you watch the same channel and see that MSNBC/NBC/GE as a whole is involved in this charade. That the people who are supposed to be bringing us unfiltered facts are spinning for their own benefit.

I don’t expect this comment, like so many of my others, to be approved, while the racist/sexist/xenophobic comments of the smaller brained users are approved. Still, I want you all to see that there are people watching and listening. You’re not absolved from this disgusting political climate we dwell in. You, yourselves are also “awash in this filth”.

Then I moseyed on over to Booman Tribune where there’s a post on the comment. Still upset, I posted:

I just read the Special Comment. Yeah, it was good, blah, blah, blah…didn’t say anything I didn’t post on my own blog earlier to day. Still, I’m mad. At MSNBC. At the media in general. This is their doing.

I know there are bigots. Bigots know that with a 24 hr. new cycle and so many 24 hr. news stations, that their bullshit will get amplified, spun, dissected and misdirected. They know that in a month, these pundits will act as if the whole thing was just a misunderstanding and that attacking that person (especially if they’re white) will become out of bounds. That’s why someone like Ferraro feels she can speak that way. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear,some time in late April, their pundits picking up the ball and running away with it, while chastising anyone (especially if they’re black) who dares insults Ferraro.

This is such a steaming load, ya know…When the people of Pennsylvania vote…we’re going to hear about this again. But the facts will be so twisted, it will be back to CrazyLand on TV. If Obama loses whites by anything more than 30%, those same pundits will ask, “Are white voters tired of the Obama campaign injecting race into these contests? Is this a reaction to Ferraro being drummed off the Clinton campaign.” No one’s going to remember Olbermann’s fucking Special Comment. No one’s going respond with the facts. They’ll pretend that the Obama campaign called for Obama’s head and that Clinton graciously responded.

Bleeech.

Liza responded clearly with the reason why I was mad:

It pisses me off that it take a white guy on a cable news show for people like us to be vindicated, but if it is a black woman pointing the obvious, she is just being a divisive and ‘reverse racist’ bitch.

OMG…someone in the liberal blogosphere who gets it! My reply:

I’ve been called that…I’ve gotten the doe eyes, “What racism?”…it’s enough to make me puke. And yes:

It pisses me off that it take a white guy on a cable news show for people like us to be vindicated

That is precisely why I’m steamed. I’ve sat here looking at accepted racism in the liberal blogosphere, had these morons tell me that I’m “being overly-sensitive” or that “maybe the person is having a bad day” or any other such bullshit, but let some white guy on TV tell them that something has crossed a line and it’s like blinders falling off.

And now, all those racists Democrats, and there’s no pretending that they don’t exist, have cover thanks to Ferraro and Clinton. I don’t ever want to hear another Clinton supporter who defended Ferraro’s remarks whine about sexism, real or perceived.

But I’m even more disgusted by people like Tubbs-Jones, Rangel, and Jackson Lee who just sat there and did nothing, said nothing. They could have stood up publicly and said, “This is not right, nor acceptable.”

They said nothing.

I’m an utterly disgusted with Democrats today.

I am done. I wrote a letter to the DNC today about this.

I would like to register my disappointment in the ugly turn the Democratic party has taken these past few weeks. I dmit freely to being an Obama supporter, though Dodd was my first choice.

The only reason I turned to Obama after Iowa was because of the race-baiting tactics from the Clinton’s campaign between July 2007 and Jan. 4, 2008.

That entire time, the party leaders were silent. They stood by why a fellow Senator and Democrat used right-wing talking points, to denigrate a candidate. As a black female, as a Muslim woman, Sen. Clinton’s antics were something I expect from someone like George Allen or Trent Lott.

I had hoped that after news reports mentioned that Bill Clinton has been “talked to” about his Southern Strategy, that we had seen the last of the race-baiting from the Clinton’s. I was wrong.

Geraldine Ferraro’s comments from last month and these past few days were not only out of bounds as Democrats,
but also as a functioning member of society. It pains me that the party I was raised in accepts these sorts of remarks.

I’ve sat here for the past 3 days, wondering when a party leader would step in an speak up on behalf of the most loyal bloc of the Democratic party. There was nothing. I sat here the last day searching elected officials websites and local papers throughout this country, looking for something from some elected offical denouncing Ferraro’s remarks, chastising the Clinton’s for not taking a harder stance on her outdated and factually incorrect statements. The silence is deafening.

I receive a lot of requests for money from you guys. When I had money, I gave freely. I volunteer my time and energy to get Democrats elected. I make phone calls, I blog, I email. This is all going to stop as of today. Because today, I am not proud to call myself a Democrat. Today, I am ashamed, as a black person in the United States, to associate with a party where racist statements are simply “disagreed” with.

There’ll probably no more energy expended by me on behalf of the Democratic Party. I will continue to do what I can to get Sen. Obama in the White House. If the party decides to give the nomination to Clinton, then I will sit this year out. We Democrats are faced with the historic option of voting for a woman or a non-white male, come November. I’m unwilling to step into the gutter to vote for the former.

Can we please get some new black leadership?

Ben Smith at Politico give us this:

A Ferraro flashback

“If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn’t be in the race,” she said.

Really. The cite is an April 15, 1988 Washington Post story (byline: Howard Kurtz), available only on Nexis.

Here’s the full context:

Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric, Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign. President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don’t ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his “radical” views, “if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn’t be in the race.”

Asked about this at a campaign stop in Buffalo, Jackson at first seemed ready to pounce fiercely on his critics. But then he stopped, took a breath, and said quietly, “Millions of Americans have a point of view different from” Ferraro’s.

Discussing the same point in Washington, Jackson said, “We campaigned across the South . . . without a single catcall or boo. It was not until we got North to New York that we began to hear this from Koch, President Reagan and then Mrs. Ferraro . . . . Some people are making hysteria while I’m making history.”

AMERCIAblog points out that back on Feb. 27th, Geraldine Ferraro said on FOX:

FERRARO: If Barack Obama were a white man, would we be talking about this as a potential real problem for Hillary?

If he were a woman…

GIBSON: You mean if he were John Edwards?

FERRARO: If he were a woman of any color, would he be in this position that he’s in, absolutely not.

GIBSON: Geraldine, are you playing the race card?

FERRARO: No, and that’s the problem. Every time you say the truth - I’m the first person, John, and you know how honest I am, I am the first person who will say in 1984 if my name were Gerard instead of Geraldine, I would never have been picked as the vice presidential candidate.

And most recently, in the Daily Breeze:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position,” she continued. “And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.” Ferraro does not buy the notion of Obama as the great reconciler.

As we now know, Ferraro took her talking points to the Daily Breeze on Feb. 28th and made the same statement.  For whatever reason, the Daily Breeze decided not to release that interview until recently.  I’m sure it has nothing to do with hurting Clinton’s chances on March 4th. </sarcasm> Ferraro has now spent the last 2 days on FOX defending her comments.  It is important to note that Ferraro is a FOX political contributor.  She feels more than comfortable saying these things there, because that’s the sort of thing they say there.

I mention all this to make it clear that Ferraro does have a pattern of this brand of race-baiting.  She can pretend that she’s not a bigot, but her statements make it hard to defend that stance.

That being said, I’m curious that not one of our so-called black leaders are denouncing this statement.  Whether they support Obama or not, the statement is the height of intelligence insulting and race-baiting.  It’s obvious that this is a dog-whistle fog horn to the supposed racists of Pennsylvania.   I only wonder why the Clinton’s didn’t think it wouldn’t have worked in Ohio or Texas.

But there is something we’re not hearing.  The silence is louder than the Hillbots psychotically blaming Obama for Ferraro’s statements (after all, how dare he be half-black!) .  It’s the silence of all those black men and women we’ve elected for higher offices.  It’s the lack of condemnation from people like Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, Rep. John Conyers, Mayor Andrew Young, Rep. Maxine Waters, Rep. Charles Rangel etc…Where is Tavis Smiley?  Where is Julian Bond?  Where is Maya Angelou?  They’re all Clinton supporters and they’ve been strangely silent on this.  One could only assume that they agree with the Clinton’s race-baiting.  Or are they just being good House Negroes?

I do not wonder why the media is complicit in this.

In 2006, Harry Belafonte, who is a singer and has never held an elected office, praised Hugo Chavez.   A few days later, Sen. Barack Obama was on some cable talkshow and the host actually asked Obama what his feelings on Belafonte’s statement was.  Now follow me here…when that dude shot up Virginia Tech, did they trot out Jackie Chan, Margaret Cho or Sen. Daniel Inouye?  White people are always shooting up places or kidnapping people, but you never see a white person on TV being asked to condemn the terrorist and to distance themselves and therefore the entire white race from the psycho.

Let’s do a little exercise.  Let’s pick white people’s favorie boogeyman/codeword, Al Sharpton–keeping in mind that he is NOT and Obama surrogate or supporter–had gotten on TV.  So Al Sharpton has an interview and says, “If Clinton was a man, she would not be in this position.  And if she was a man (of any color) she would not be in this position. She happens to be very lucky to be who she is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

How fast do you think it would take for the Clinton’s campaign to insist that Sen. Obama “reject and denounce” thoses statements.  How much time and ink would be spent by pundits and bloggers decrying Sharpton’s injecting of race in the campaign?  How many black politicians would have been trotted out on TV to denounce Sharpton?  How many times would Stephanie Tubbs-Jones would have had her black ass on TV playing Mammy to Clinton?

Can we please get some new black leadership?

You know, these past 7 years would have been a lot easier if the media had done any sort of investigative journalism and if our Democrats in Congress had acted like they represented the people vs. their own interests or campaign donors. It’s pretty clear that the Iraq War was nothing more than an expensive and deadly ATM for many of our elected officials. They have blood on their hands and no amount of apologizing or mind-changing this late in the game is going to alter the landscape. Whoever voted for this war despite loud criticism of the boondoggle that was to become, is just the same as if they gunned down our soldiers themselves.

So, there’s been a study. Keep in mind, that almost 5 years into this illegal war, our media conglomerates (many whose parent companies are making big money from this war–MSNBC I’m looking at you) didn’t find it necessary to do any digging. A study, that was completely unnecesssary– and I’m sure cost a lot of money as these CW studies are wont to do, was done. A study focusing on comments on the runup to the illegal war.

MSNBC ran an AP article on this study. All emphasis is mine:

WASHINGTON - A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Yeah. We knew that. Hell, many of us knew that before the war started. Those of us who called the administration on their lies were called “unpatriotic” by the more unstable among us. Even elected officials called us “unpatriotic” and then would turn around and deny it.

The study, completed by the Center for Public Integrity and Fund for Independence in Journalism is huge.

The information itself isn’t new because the documents all have been published, the researchers said. The database, however, is remarkable for its breadth — transcripts and documents totaling some 380,000 words. (UPI)

From CPIs website:

On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration’s case for war.

I remember the first time I heard the Bush Administration reference Iraq. It was November 2001. My ears perked up. I knew that if Bush had become president, that we’d engage in a war. I knew it and I told everyone I knew that I knew it. No one believed me. I was brushed off. Whatever. Then November 2001 came, and I heard “Iraq”. I made a bet with a coworker that we’d have a war with Iraq. He didn’t believe me. I won $500.

I remember laughing my ass off when I heard this adminstration trying to tie Saddam Hussein with al-Qaeda. I mean…anyone who can read would know that Hussein joining in with al-Qaeda would be as possible as a neo-Nazi marrying a black person. You don’t even have to know the region. It’s simple math:

Iraq = secular nation

al-Qaeda = Qur’an thumping nutjobs.

They like totally cancel out each other. Oil and water is what we have here.

Now of course, the newest term from the administration has been “al-Qaeda in Iraq” to, you know, differentiate their lies.

Of course, our stenographers media couldn’t be bothered with printing facts. They were busy doing he said/she said journalism because they felt so bad going after Clinton. WTF?

In addition to their patently false pronouncements, Bush and these seven top officials also made hundreds of other statements in the two years after 9/11 in which they implied that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or links to Al Qaeda. Other administration higher-ups, joined by Pentagon officials and Republican leaders in Congress, also routinely sounded false war alarms in the Washington echo chamber.

The cumulative effect of these false statements — amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts — was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war. Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, “independent” validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq.

It would be my dream to not only see everyone in the Bush Administration tried for war crimes, but also these propoganda mouthpieces that urged these lies at the expense of the deaths and injuries to our troops. People like Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh who, even after Bush said that there were no WMD back in 2004 still bleated the party line.

“Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, ‘independent’ validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq,” it said.

You should read the study. There’s a page dedicated to the key false statements leading up to the war. These were the statements that left me practically crazed. I’d read/watch/hear these things and was left incredulous. Surely, there’s a reporter who would ask the obvious questions, bringing up facts or…something. Right? Nope. They’d ask their questions and take at face value, the even more ridiculous explanations. Instead of researching responses, they decided to appear “fair” and clearly unbalanced by giving us he said/she said bullshit, with very little facts, always giving a clearer edge to the warmongers.

Beyond the terrible death toll and ridiculous amounts of money missing and spent, one of the saddest things of this whole thing is listening to Republicans, those true-believing Kool-Aid drinkers who still insist that WMD were found in Iraq. Who decide that listening to unhinged nitwits like Sean (ins)Hannity is all they need to learn about the Middle East and they know how Saddam Hussein operated. They know the mind of bin Laden. They know that in order to “free” a people, you must bomb them to the Stone Age.

Bush and Cheney’s friends have made a shitload of money off the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. That was the purpose of our War President. He doesn’t give a shit about Democracy or the American people. The fact that even when caught in these lies, they’re shrugged off…”And?”

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration’s position that the world community viewed Iraq’s leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.

“The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world,” Stanzel said.

It’s pathological. Even when caught in a lie, they keep on lying.

Wait…maybe CNN is moronic for still posting this like it was news, but you know how morons are…

Zanata Moore-El asked Obama if he was an atheist.

[snip]

“I hated having to ask him that,” Moore-El told a reporter. “But I heard he was like an atheist. I don’t want a president who’s an atheist. I’m a firm believer in God. I just really wanted to make sure because I really wanted to vote for him and he has some good topics and everything.”

What kind of cretin votes for someone because of religious beliefs or even lack thereof? I couldn’t even imagine voting for someone because of their religious of beliefs or lack of one, let alone not voting for them because of their religious beliefs or lack of one. I mean, I think more than a few of the mainstream religious denominations or little more than cults, but I’ve still voted for people who prided themselves in their cultfaith because they were qualified for the job. I don’t care if they pray to a Cabbage Patch Doll every day at 5:32pm if they can do the job.

*I changed the title. I started feeling an tiny bit bad because Moore-el probably can’t help being a moron, but I can’t have him/her ego-surfing and finding that title. That’s not cool and it’s just my stupid opinion anyway.

We all remember some of the most blatantly stupid lies that the media peddled/fabricated/repeated to get us into war with Iraq. Greenwald does a great job is juxtaposing Iraq ‘03/’04 and Iran ‘07. There’s nothing to add except I would have like to see a little more of the lies from ‘06 tossed in there too.