FWDAJ Extra – 2009-09-30
by Roger Benningfield on Sep.30, 2009, under Podcast
It’s the second installment absolutely no one requested! This time I’m covering –in a wholly untimely fashion– Jane’s comments on the April 15th Tea Parties, Democratic hypocrisy, the CIA torture investigation, Obama & racism, and healthcare. This episode is about twice as long as the first, so if you disliked it, you’re really gonna hate this one a bunch.
Oh, and stay tuned for a full episode of FWDAJ, which I’m editing even as I post this.
September 30th, 2009 on 2:54 pm
I was there and consider the event transformative. The crowd was huge, polite and angry.The press tried to downplay the size of crowd which best estimates was at least 800,000; the left tried to suggest these were fanatical racists–they were nothing of the sort; liars like (“the CIA always lies”)Pelosi twisted words and selected the rare sign(“Bury Obamacare with Ted”–not “Bury Obama with Ted”)to suggest this was a threatening, mean-spirited crowd. Again, nothing could be further from the truth.
Compare this huge crowd and its stellar behavior and belated, unfait press coverage with the treatment the press gave the small, violent and really ugly G-20 demonstrators.QED
October 1st, 2009 on 2:29 am
For what it’s worth, as I mentioned in the show notes above, I was responding to a quote from Jane that was pre-9/12… so I was talking about the 4/15 Tea Parties.
As to why I was talking about news five months old at this point? ‘Cause I’m slooooooow.
September 30th, 2009 on 4:11 pm
Concerning the 9-12 Tea Party coverage. Excluding cable and internet – the coverage was minimal. Hundreds of thousands of people , if not a million plus, that never “protest” came to D.C. to voice their concerns about an out of control federal government. Not the usual anti-war/G-20 rent-a-mob. The lack of coverage really stands out after reading endless stories during the Bush Presidency of Cindy Sheehan, International ANSWER, and any gathering of more than 15 anti-war people.
October 1st, 2009 on 2:38 am
I’m going to admit something that I haven’t heretofore admitted because I hadn’t actually thought about it at all. Which means I’m not so much “admitting” as “remembering”, but whatevs…
I haven’t watched a network news broadcast in, sheesh, at least a decade. To me, if it isn’t CNN/Fox and isn’t on the Web, it doesn’t exist. So my perceptions of coverage may be skewed, because the places I turn for news (cable, blogs, Friendfeed, Twitter) were flooded with TP analysis, pro and con.
I *will* note that the CBS/ABC/NBC triumvirate only have 30 minutes an evening to say something about anything, so pretty much any one day event is bound to flit on and off their radar quickly. They do have the Sunday shows, of course… did none of them talk TP stuff?
September 30th, 2009 on 4:52 pm
First of all, I think you owe Jane an apology for using the phrase “Hard On”, while responding to something she said. I was always taught that such language to or in front of a lady is a sign of ignorance.
Secondly, I reject your interpretation of our constitution regarding the Bill of Rights.
You said, “The Federalists believed that every right imagined is real and can only be limited by the federal government using the powers granted to it by the constitution.”
If you believe that the constitution grants our rights then you must also believe the constitution can ungrant and take them away? Jefferson wrote in our Declaration of Independence, “We were endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are the right to life liberty and property.” Our rights don’t come from government or constitutions, they come from a higher power. When we enter this world, we are endowed by our creator with the right to speak our minds, the right to worship as we wish, etc. The Bill of Rights does not grant power to the government, it guarantees our rights as individuals.
More Jane Please!
Ralph Hayden
Hudson MA
October 1st, 2009 on 3:32 am
There’s only so much I can apologize to Jane for the “hard on” comment. First, because after being friends for nearly sixteen years, I’m almost certain she’s heard far, far more scandalous things from me. Second, because I was always taught that speaking differently to a lady than you would a gentleman was a sign of being a sexist dickhead.
But just for you: “Jane, I’m sorry I mentioned Barack Obama’s hypothetically throbbing, Michelle-pleasing staff of raw erectile function.”
Ralph: “Secondly, I reject your interpretation of our constitution regarding the Bill of Rights.”
I’m just passing along the thoughts of the guy who wrote it. But if you wanna reject them, hey, get down with your bad self.
Ralph: “If you believe that the constitution grants our rights then you must also believe the constitution can ungrant and take them away?”
Um, that’s nearly opposite of what I said. The Constitution –as designed– is a document defining the limited powers of a government to restrict the liberty of its citizens. The default assumption of the Constitution is that citizens have unlimited, unimagined freedoms at their disposal, and the government’s power to deny those freedoms will be limited to the means specified in that august instrument.
For better or worse, certain delegates to the Constitutional Convention were paranoid that if a list of basic Rights weren’t included in the Constitution, lawyers might start parsing its phrasing for ways to make the government more powerful than intended. (And wow, were they ever right on that one.) To get them to sign on, a Bill of Rights was required.
Unfortunately, that just encouraged an entirely different type of lawyer to look at the Constitution and decide that if something isn’t specifically mentioned, it isn’t protected. Which means, I guess, that the real flaw in the Constitution was that it didn’t ban lawyers.
As for the Constitution’s power to take away liberty… well, ya might want to look into the 18th Amendment, which demonstrated that power most
stupidlyeffectively.All this aside, one of the problems when talking about The Framers’ “original intent” is that it only took We The People about five post-ratification minutes to start throwing all its fine principles out the window.
October 1st, 2009 on 12:59 am
Roger, I am a consumer of news. I was overseas in Korea on the day of the 9/12 Tea Party. I had access to CNN International and BBC. Not 1 word, not 1 syllable, not 1 ticker of the event crossed the tickers at the bottom of the TV screen in the hours I was intentionally searching for the event. It was a conscious effort to hide the news of a massive, unparalleled American Protest from the eyes of the World. I got tons of other domestic US news at the same instant on the same channels, as well as all the advertisements about how hard Johnathan Mann or Christina Amanpora work to give us the news that is vitally important and that we just can’t get anywhere else. Overseas I get Obama speeches in real time, Clinton’s criticisms of Conservatives in half hour updates, and breaking news that Jimmy Carter says opposition to Obama is racist. But as for the DC Tea Party, nothing. Over a 48 hour period in the Hilton in Seoul, during the hours I was watching, not a word. Thankfully the following day in Guangzhou China I was able to read about it in the China Daily in English and see it on CCTV (Communist China TV), but still not on CNN International. Get out more. It would do your smug parochialism a world of good.
Listening to your comments simply on the media’s coverage of the event is as frustrating as listening to Dick’s constant repetition of the lame, uninformed and untrue mantra that FOX never carried the Joint House speech of Obama live. Absolutely false, but a nice talking point. We want the facts. We are intelligent enough to interpret them ourselves. Unfortunately the Leftist Media is intentionally withholding facts from citizens (ACORN Videotapes, Van Jones, NEA Phonecalls, etc). If nothing else you need Jane on that Show just to bring such indisputable facts up, because though Dick brings up facts, frequently they are as false as his incorrect opinion of FOX’s coverage of Obama’s speech, or your refutable contention that the Lefitist Media covered the DC Protest in a responsible manner. Go Jane indeed.
October 1st, 2009 on 3:49 am
I seldom think the Leftist/Rightist/Ambidextrous Media covers anything in a responsible manner. Basically, there was a shining, post-’60s period where journalists as a whole got all passionate about their profession and started to dream that they were vital players on the national scene.
But before that, and since…? They’ve generally been a bunch of manipulative, cash-grabbing ass-clowns who are more interested in bleeding and leading than the truth.
October 1st, 2009 on 8:22 am
My turn, I guess, Roger,
First of all, you said you are “not exactly a liberal”. SO when did that happen? For as long as I’ve known you, you have been a liberal. Don’t tell me you have gone further left.
Secondly, you stated that FOX sponsored the Tea party – or some Tea Party. Can you prove that – because I’ve seen or heard none of that. I saw exactly 3 news crews in DC. One from German TV; one from French TV, and one for European TV. And I’m pretty sure the Washington Post wasn’t there because they reported 60,000 people. I was talking about major media, and you talked about AR media. Even FOx news didn’t have much to say about the Tea Party – at least not as much as should have been said.
I loved your blaming of academia for all the “racial” characterizations. YA think? Gee maybe that Bill Ayers indoctrination model has finally caught on. Frankly I think you have given in on the “racism” thing. The issue is not finding a less powerful word, it is to make the word less powerful. When you can accuse someone of being a racist, and someone can reply, “yeah, so what?” we will have won our battle with the PC idiots and racism will stop being the excuse of everything someone on the left disapproves of. Did you ever stop and wonder why calling President Bush “Bushhitler” for 8 years was all in vogue, while accusing Obama of lying (when he was lying) causes Nancy Pelosi to invoke Harvey Milk while swatting away the tears? I dunno Roger – when ever I am squarely faced with a double standard I want to make sure I am no where near it.
Your “conservatism is resistance to change” stuff was interesting, but I think you miss something (which is a clue for those of us trying to push it). On my side we like, or dare I say love, the constitution. We don’t want people adding rights (healthcare) without the proper amendments. We don’t want people converting privileges to rights, because they can. Whimsy is not that attractive. Besides, the congress is so bloody incompetent, why would you trust them to do anything but sell you out?
BTW, I saw black, young and I assume, gay people at the Tea party. I was surprised by how many black people were there – and not one talking about his color but rather the fact that he was an American. And there were a surprising amount of young people as well, altho the majority were clearly around my age. (Perhaps that accounts for the lack of trash). AS for the gays, as you know my business partner is gay and she is as, if not more conservative, than I am. She too wants to be identified as an American, not used by the left as a tool to keep her on the outside.
That’s right – the left needs blacks and gays to be in a constant state of rebellion, because we certainly can’t have them leading happy lives. Hell they could lose votes over that.
Your litany on Bush and Iraq was interesting, but truly not a good comparison. Bush was strung apart for 8 years – he was constantly investigated – and in fact this administration thinks that worked so well they want to keep at it. As for the CIA – ya know, if I knew that every administration in a revolving door of trying to create a distraction might put me in jail and bankrupt me as a little political tactic, no I wouldn’t join the CIA – and neither would you. I can’t believe that your excuse for Eric “I will not investigate the black panthers” Holder is for the CIA to man up.
Now on to Health care. Health care is not a right. If it was you would point to where it says that. No one has proposed an amendment to make it a right either. Until they do, its not a right.
As for getting a job – too much to ask? How about forgoing that large screen TV in case you have an emergency? How about not taking that big vacation? Or are there rights to those things too? How about not buying a house you can’t afford. Now I know those are stupid ideas simply because those of us who didn’t do that stuff are now being forced to pay for those who did, but still, it’s a thought.
October 1st, 2009 on 12:20 pm
Jane: “SO when did that happen?”
I’ve never considered myself a liberal. Adopting that label leaves me rubbing shoulders with PETA, eco-terrorists, the corpse of Andrea Dworkin, anarchist nitwits, 9/11 Truthers, and so on. I’m not willing to line up with someone just because we share a similar set of opponents.
Jane: “Secondly, you stated that FOX sponsored the Tea party – or some Tea Party. Can you prove that – because I’ve seen or heard none of that.”
Again, I wasn’t talking about the 9/12 Tea Party… I didn’t pay any attention to it myself, so I’m in no position to talk about how it was covered. What you were talking about in the clip –and thus, what I was responding to– was the coverage on 4/15. *That* I watched closely.
As for proof of it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jfffjkTieo
(That’s a new link… Fox had the other video pulled. There’s a better one out there, but it features Olbermann, and I don’t wanna force anyone to watch him.)
Jane: “The issue is not finding a less powerful word, it is to make the word less powerful.”
We can’t afford for the word to become less powerful. Ethnic cleansing still happens. The Nation of Islam still operates. The Klan still exists. Full-on, balls-out racial hatred is real, and “racism” is as good a word for it as any.
It’s the more subtle stuff, the politics of privilege… that’s where we need words that get the point across and address the issue without being unnecessarily inflammatory.
“Did you ever stop and wonder why calling President Bush “Bushhitler” for 8 years was all in vogue, while accusing Obama of lying (when he was lying) causes Nancy Pelosi to invoke Harvey Milk while swatting away the tears?”
If you go back and look at my news blog from the early-to-mid 2000s, you’ll find repeated references to how incredibly stupid it was to compare GWB to Hitler, call him the “worst president ever”, and so on. It betrayed an ignorance of history (Woodrow Wilson did everything Bush did, multiplied times ten) and an ignorance of what real evil looks like.
Oh, and as an aside, Obama wasn’t lying. And Pelosi is a moron.
Jane: “On my side we like, or dare I say love, the constitution. We don’t want people adding rights (healthcare) without the proper amendments.”
That’s kind of the point I’m trying to make. Saying you love the Constitution is only the first step. You’ve also got to understand how and why it was constructed.
Jane: “Health care is not a right. If it was you would point to where it says that.”
Read the Federalist Papers… rights are not defined by the Constitution. The Father of the Constitution said this. The Bill of Rights was inserted solely to make double-dog certain that the most basic set of rights had extra protection… the BoR is essentially a second condom slipped over the governmental prophylactic that is the Constitution.
We don’t get out rights from the government or our founding documents. They simply enforce or deny them, as the situation demands. If We The People decide not to fund the right to healthcare, or defend the right to privacy, or whatever, that’s a matter of politics. But the underlying rights are no less real… black people had the right to freedom long before the government started enforcing it.
Again, these truths are self-evident.
Jane: “That’s right – the left needs blacks and gays to be in a constant state of rebellion, because we certainly can’t have them leading happy lives. Hell they could lose votes over that.”
Or it could just be that blacks and gays are generally pissed off for entirely legitimate reasons. It could be that being told repeatedly by white, straight (IOW, “normal”) people that they’ve got it “good enough” is not productive. It could also be that there’s so much self-hatred within their communities (thanks to the “good enough” message that conflicts with actual experience) that they end up exacerbating their own troubles.
And let’s face it, while it’s vaguely possible that dramatic changes in living conditions could move blacks to vote Republican en masse, that’s never going to happen with the gay community as long as Republicans cling to an Evangelical base that openly despises homosexuals.
Jane: “I can’t believe that your excuse for Eric “I will not investigate the black panthers” Holder is for the CIA to man up.”
I dunno about you, but I hold the CIA to a standard far higher than that of the Black Panthers or any other private group. As far as I’m concerned, the CIA, FBI, DoD, and NSA should be under near-constant investigation.
Jane: “As for getting a job – too much to ask?”
Like I said, in an environment where unemployment is rising right along with insurance restrictions and premiums, yeah, it really is.
Jane: “How about forgoing that large screen TV in case you have an emergency? How about not taking that big vacation?”
If you wanna go down that road, I’ll go with ya… but we’ve gotta bring *everyone* along for the ride. Like all those people who would be doing just fine right now if they hadn’t had kids. Try selling the “personal responsibility” mantra at the next Tea Party by using the inherent fiscal responsibility of childlessness as an example. See how long it takes the crowd to chase you off with torches and pitchforks.
We all think (to some degree) that we’ve made the right bets in life. Whether it’s putting your money in your 401k, your TV, your offspring, your church, your marriage, or whatever. And let’s face it, most of us aren’t even bright enough to program a VCR. The bar is set at many different heights.
At the end of the day, the question becomes, “How bad a Life Gambler do you have to be before you deserve to get sick and die?” To me? Your crimes against frugality had better be bigger than choosing to drive to Reno last summer.
October 1st, 2009 on 8:56 am
The written replies to Roger, are good and worth reading.
October 2nd, 2009 on 8:23 pm
Again, I wasn’t talking about the 9/12 Tea Party…
Okay, but where is the proof that FOX sponsored any tea party? Your so called proof was an advertisement for something called Star gate. I’m not sure if it was a mistake or a joke. (The sound
on this computer is toast)
We can’t afford for the word to become less powerful.
Of course we can. Murder is murder no matter what color you are. Or do you think motives other than race make crimes more palatable? If you never want equality to never happen anywhere, then make sure you hold on to all those words tightly that divide us. That is nothing but a liberal judgment having nothing to do with the content of anyone’s character.
It’s the more subtle stuff, the politics of privilege… that’s where we need words that get the point across and address the issue without being unnecessarily inflammatory.
This is where you and I differ. I’m not sure I know what you mean by privilege but I’m fairly sure you are talking money. You want privilege – go out and earn it. Then change it from within.
Oh, and as an aside, Obama wasn’t lying. And Pelosi is a moron.
Obama was lying. Wilson brought numerous amendments to the bill which denied illegals coverage and none of them were allowed to go to a vote. Obama knows that.
Read the Federalist Papers… rights are not defined by the Constitution.
I have read them – granted it was a millennium or two ago.
Or it could just be that blacks and gays are generally pissed off for entirely legitimate reasons.
I don’t buy it. Blacks are told in an endless loop that whites hate them, whites put them down, whites blah blah blah. It’s how the left keeps them in line.
You can be brought up seeing that or seeing opportunity, in the country where the most opportunity in the world exists. It’s a choice.
And let’s face it, while it’s vaguely possible that dramatic changes in living conditions could move blacks to vote Republican en masse, that’s never going to happen with the gay community as long as Republicans cling to an Evangelical base that openly despises homosexuals.
That’s the world you live in, not mine. Amy is a bigger conservative than I am, because she doesn’t define herself by her sexuality but by her belief that she can will be judged on her merits. And it so funny, because she is. She also strongly believes that others can believe anything they want, including that she is wrong. She has more strength of character in her pinkie than 200 whiners.
I dunno about you, but I hold the CIA to a standard far higher than that of the Black Panthers or any other private group.
And clearly a higher one than you hold Eric Holder to.
Try selling the “personal responsibility” mantra at the next Tea Party by using the inherent fiscal responsibility of childlessness as an example. See how long it takes the crowd to chase you off with torches and pitchforks.
You don’t have to be childless to be fiscally responsible Roger. Maybe it is as simple as putting your affairs in order, acting timely, saving for a rainy day. I was 48 years old before I began to see my way out of the weeds, but I spent all that time before and after getting there. If someone else chooses a detour, I don’t want to pay for them.
“How bad a Life Gambler do you have to be before you deserve to get sick and die?”
Everyone dies Roger. And everyone leaves behind a life and a history. How you manage that is freedom, but the cost of freedom should be that it is my choice whether to pick up the bill or not.
October 3rd, 2009 on 8:52 am
RE: video
Fox had the video pulled via the DMCA… that’s why the link was broken. (YouTube should have their butts kicked for pulling it, since there’s no way it was a legit violation.) I added a link to a new video in the original comment… it isn’t the best one I’ve found, but the alternative was making you sit through several minutes of Keith Olbermann, and no one deserves that sort of cruelty.
October 3rd, 2009 on 2:36 pm
Can you just tell me what the proof is? (I have no sound on this computer.) If it’s an allegation of Keith Olbermann don’t even bother.