Limbaugh's America
I understand that Rush Limbaugh has been going on lately about “Obama’s America.” Really? Does America belong to its President? Are we owned by our President? Does the President proscribe our actions and control the social environment in our country? Though that is the way conservatives would like it to be (only with a conservative authority figure controlling society), that is not the way it is.Truth be known, this is much more Limbaugh’s America than it is Obama’s. When Limbaugh started his radio show in 1988 after the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, the political dialogue in this country, though very imperfect, was not nearly as ugly and lacking in civility as it is now. The following is an excerpt from The Conservative Century: From Reaction to Revolution by Gregory L. Schneider:
“One of the most unheralded parts of the Reagan years was the decision made in 1987 by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), established by the New Deal in the 1930’s, to abolish The Fairness Doctrine. The Supreme Court had ruled that the doctrine-which stipulated that broadcasters provide “equal time” during coverage of political events or discussion- was not law, but rather a regulation, freeing the FCC to get rid of it... With the equal time provision ended, talk radio helped catapult conservatives to the forefront of control of the nation’s AM airwaves.”
At that time in this country, there was general Conservative complaint about the state of society. One of their biggest complaints was that Liberals were bullying people into “Political Correctness.” Nobody was allowed to speak their mind and it was impossible to thoroughly discuss and explore any issue because only half of the story could be told, they complained.
Rush Limbaugh was on the front line of that argument. His eventual rise in power and popularity has allowed him the freedom to say whatever he wants no matter how racist, intolerant, insensitive, sexist or just downright ignorant. His popularity and resultant power have given him the opportunity to spout the following gems over time:
"Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society."
"We're not sexists, we're chauvinists -- we're male chauvinist pigs, and we're happy to be because…We think that's what women want."
"Sorry to say this, I don't think he's [Philadelphia Eagles’ quarterback Donovan McNabb] been that good from the get-go. I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well."
"The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies."
"They oughtta change Black History Month to Black Progress Month and start measuring it."
( This is why I would never make a political pundit. I happen to think this is a GOOD idea! And I'd probably go check in with Matt Bastard or Angry Black Woman for a status report. )
Comments from Left Field
http://commentsfromleftfield.com
Hilarious Quote of the Day
When do you fight for something? When you think it’s the worst possible option?Obama ”will obviously weigh in when it’s important to weigh in” on the possibility of a public option, chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said. Added Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett: ”He’s not demanding that it’s in there. He think it’s the best possible choice.”Lookin’ good, guys; keep it up:
I just don’t think these folks get how, hmmm, how can I put this, how nonsensical it sounds to say, Obama really thinks the public option is “the best possible choice,” but he won’t fight for it. Maybe they think that messaging works. It doesn’t. Sounds weak. If he’s not going to fight for the “best possible choice,” what will he fight for?
The Angry Black Woman
Race, Politics, Gender, Sexuality, Anger
http://theangryblackwoman.com
Health care IS an anti-racist issue.
(And feminist, and anti-classist, and pro-GLBTQI, and anti-ablist, and so on. It’s a human right.)
To start off, a couple of booksThe Real Cost of Prison Project Comics that have been thoroughly researched dealing with the War on Drugs, the cost of Prison Towns and how prison affects women and children.
The Incarcerated Woman: Rehabilative Programming in Women’s Prisons (Paperback)
Resistance behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women
Lets take a short look at how disabled prisoners are treated in prison in a couple of developed countries:
Continue reading »
The Incarcerated Woman: Rehabilative Programming in Women’s Prisons (Paperback)
Resistance behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women
Lets take a short look at how disabled prisoners are treated in prison in a couple of developed countries:
Continue reading »
Yes, that string of words in the subject line actually means something. Last Drink Bird Head is a charity anthology being put together by master anthologists Ann and Jeff VanderMeer. In their own words,
The purpose of the awards is to celebrate those in the genre community who enrich us with their time, energy, and words, often for causes greater than themselves.Proceeds from the anthology go to ProLiteracy.org, for the promotion of adult literacy. The anthology’s a limited edition and has a truly star-studded table of contents, so order yours now if you want a copy. But back to the point — who have they nominated for this year’s “Gentle Advocacy” award? Why, it’s one of ABW’s own:
Gentle AdvocacyThrow your hands up for KTB! And cross your fingers so she’ll win.
In recognition of individuals willing to enter into blunt discourse about controversial issues…
- K. Tempest Bradford
- Nick Mamatas
- John Scalzi
Sorry guys. I accidentally deleted the disabled women athletes’ post twice tonight and I am so frustrated and angry at myself right now that its probably best for me to step away from the computer, before I lose my temper and throw the contraption outside.
So while I’m recovering my equilibrium, PBS has got a series called The National Parks: America’s Best Idea Their history is absolutely fascinating.
And I’d like to congratulate Rio on winning the bid for the 2018 Olympics. May they not be saddled with cost overruns, boondoggles and debt.
…
Um. On the subject of media? Did anyone watch Surrogates? What did you think about it?
EDIT on the subject of the National Parks.
So my rec was based on watching one episode of the miniseries. Which situation has boomeranged on me. Cause I started watching others over the weekend. And as my commenters here have pointed out, it is a VERY whitewashed series. Its all about the doings of rich white people. Not a word about Native American land, a lot of which was expropriated for the parks. Not a word about any agreements which may have been made between the US gov’t and the tribes. It is not surprising, therefore that a certain Christian-centric tone pervades the documentary. This is gods country, a miracle of god, these vistas are like cathedrals etc etc. And, well I just found this:Indian Country, God’s Country :Native Americans And The National Parks
So while I’m recovering my equilibrium, PBS has got a series called The National Parks: America’s Best Idea Their history is absolutely fascinating.
And I’d like to congratulate Rio on winning the bid for the 2018 Olympics. May they not be saddled with cost overruns, boondoggles and debt.
…
Um. On the subject of media? Did anyone watch Surrogates? What did you think about it?
EDIT on the subject of the National Parks.
So my rec was based on watching one episode of the miniseries. Which situation has boomeranged on me. Cause I started watching others over the weekend. And as my commenters here have pointed out, it is a VERY whitewashed series. Its all about the doings of rich white people. Not a word about Native American land, a lot of which was expropriated for the parks. Not a word about any agreements which may have been made between the US gov’t and the tribes. It is not surprising, therefore that a certain Christian-centric tone pervades the documentary. This is gods country, a miracle of god, these vistas are like cathedrals etc etc. And, well I just found this:Indian Country, God’s Country :Native Americans And The National Parks
The mythology of “gifted land” is strong in the Park Service, but some of our greatest parks were “gifted” by people who had little if any choice in the matter. Places like the Grand Canyon’s south rim and Glacier had to be bought, finagled, borrowed – or taken by force – when Indian occupants and owners resisted the call to contribute to the public welfare. The story of national parks and Indians is, depending on perspective, a costly triumph of the public interest, or a bitter betrayal of America’s native people.*sigh* Yeah. So therefore, take that as a dis-recomendation of Ken Burn’s whitewashed series.
In Indian Country, God’s Country historian Philip Burnham traces the complex relationship between Native Americans and the national parks, relating how Indians were removed, relocated, or otherwise kept at arm’s length from lands that became some of our nation’s most hallowed ground. MORE
OBSIDIAN WINGS
Hey, Joe, where you going with that gun in your hand? Pt. I.
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2009/10/hey-joe-where-you-going-with-that-gun-in-your-hand-1.html
Guest post by Gary Farber (thanks to Eric Martin, who understandably is busy! And double congrats to Eric for all that family-makin' stuff he's been doin'!)
Gary's home blog is Amygdala, and he invites you to read him there.
[Eric Martin: My friend Gary is going to be pitching in for a couple of days as I adjust to the enhanced parenting techniques that my son is submitting me too. And yes, sleep deprivation is torture.]
This is a great post, Gary. I'm going to have to take some time to digest it before posting anything of substance.
On a lighter and slightly meta note: if Gary posts on the front page, can he still comment saying that he blogged it first?
Good to see you back, and even better to see you headlining, if only temporarily.
Posted by: Catsy | October 19, 2009 at 04:07 PM
DIPLOMACY
flawed concept, failed state
http://bluecontrarian.blogspot.com
The more one learns of Pakistan, the stronger the conviction that, like the British before them, in the tribal areas of that troubled country the Americans are fast approaching the limits of their power. The British struggled for three quarters of a century to subdue the tribes of the North West Frontier without any great success, finally settling on a policy of non-interference. Islamabad has decided on a similar policy. The reasons are both historical and pragmatic. The three provinces that make up the outer rim originally federated with the Punjab on the understanding that they would enjoy a large measure of autonomy and in the ensuing half-century, every attempt by the centre to extend its control over the periphery has met with fierce and oftentimes bloody resistance. The result is that something of an uneasy standoff has developed with a delicate constitutional balance allowing for substantial self-government in the provincesExcept at the most general level, thinking strategically about the Greater Middle East is a thankless task. On the basics, everyone is agreed. The challenge is a millennial one - how to transition the Middle East out of its ruinous security competition, away from the old antagonisms and towards some version, however minimal, of the Kantian peace. Agreement at this level of abstraction is not difficult. The problems emerge when you attempt to translate this into a working policy. The problem is that the elements for such a peace are simply not in place. Next to a patchwork of small, independent sheikdoms there are the two giants - Iran and Iraq – hostile, predatory, seething with resentment and fortified by a historical sense of injustice. Massively more powerful, the two great Leviathans eye the enormous oil wealth of the tiny Gulf states with a mixture of envy and avarice. This is no recipe for a stable and enduring equilibrium. In any test of strength the Gulf states would quickly be overrun by their larger, more powerful neighbours.READ MORE >
Finally, a strategy we can support...
Robert Fox, Matthew Paris, Simon Jenkins, the Heresiarch - four writers in various states of despair about the prospects for our mission in Afghanistan. Simon Jenkins and Robert Fox are long time sceptics. Matthew Paris and the Heresiarch - along with a growing majority of the public, it seems - are more recent converts. This is worrying, because it suggests that those of us in favour of continued engagement in Afghanistan are losing the argument. Much of the new mood is bound up with the recent spike in casualties, but alongside it is a vein of criticism that addresses fundamental issues of strategy. READ MORE![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=4cef5527-ef09-483d-a15f-b04251218d4e)
Posts
Rather than go over and over well plowed fields, I keep looking for singular viewpoints that point out the obvious : what is going on in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are GOVERNMENT-DESTROYING exercises. That's what happens when local choice is murdered by foreigners.
Installation of puppet governments for western interests has always been fraught with the danger of drowning in one's own bullshit and dances around the obvious : starting civil wars in foreign countries is a simple method of organized murder that happens to be very popular and effective in generating 'defence' budget graft. In Afghanistan it has the added advantage of fighting over control of the poppy.
Think about it. The most disruptive, unpopular and expensive domestic initiative is the War on Drugs. From the viewpoint of deploying armed men to harm and cage others while generating revenue for private concerns it has been a gift that keeps on giving.
Cheney and Gonzales have been charged in Texas for profiteering on private prisons.
The largest component of U.S. forces abroad is private : outnumbering troops, unaccountable to government at home or abroad, ruthless and overpaid mercenaries.
So regular troops are a sideshow as much as what we need to watch : and even they report their Mission Statement is bullshit once boots hit the ground.
Shake 'n Bake. Quite the public relations exercise.
Here's my latest collection.
http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/10/19-oct-no-nonsense-articles-on-war-and.html