On this July 4, I don't really have much to add to all that has been said over the past few weeks. What I would like to contribute instead are a few songs. Well...it's actually the same song sung in two variations: once by the person who wrote the original, but felt moved by politics to sing it in a different way; another by a different person who also felt moved by politics to sing it in his own way--with the hope that nobody would ever have to sing it again.
I love this song. It is, in my mind, the greatest folk song ever sung. Hard to say exactly why I feel that way. For some reason, every year on July 4 I find myself looking for it, listening to it, and trying to understand why it means so much to me.
Without a doubt, one of the greatest achievements of the netroots has been the creation of new forums where citizens and elected leaders sit together and talk about the future of the country. If Thomas Jefferson could have seen the Leadership Forum at last year's YK in Chicago, he would have nodded in approval and said, "That's exactly what I meant by 'We The People.'"
Well, this year, the organizers at Netroots Nation have stepped up again, organizing another citizen-driven forum called: Ask The Speaker. Last year, we spoke with the Democratic candidates for President. This year, we will spend an entire keynote session in conversation with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Sometimes I can hardly believe how far the netroots has come, and in such a short amount of time. Amazing!
Over the past few days I have read a great many heartfelt diaries on all sides of the FISA debate. There is a full range of views out there, despite the effort of a small minority of bloggers and media figures to convince us that this is a simple, black-'n-white issue.
The FISA bill and the position of the Democratic presidential nominee on that bill has tipped progressives into a real crisis--and it deserve a serious moment of pause to understand exactly what that crisis is.
The issue we are debating, passionately and at times painfully is: loyalty.
I just finished reading all 157 pages of the DC v. Heller (PDF 1.2MB), including the Scalia opinion and the dissents by Stevens and Breyer, and I have to tell everyone: the feud between an MSNBC anchor and a blogger--as much as I respect both of them--does not add up to a hill of beans compared to the startling degree to which this 2nd Amendment case has undermined the basic concept on which our democracy is founded:
citizenship
I don't normally write smack-down diaries telling everyone to wake the heck up and stop throwing pies, but this is one of those moments where it is necessary.
DC v. Heller is not just a bad ruling. It puts the court's imprimatur on a concept of citizenship that is fundamentally counter to the principles on which this country was founded. It, is, a, nightmare.
This week, right-wing pundit and leader of the 'beat your children' movement, Dr. James Dobson, accused Sen. Barack Obama of committing violence against Biblical teachings.
Despite Dobson being a best-selling self-help guru famous for advising parents to whip their children with sticks, every mainstream media outlet somehow managed to overlook this fact. Instead, media coverage of Dobson's remarks stripped him any and all potential controversy with respect to his views on parenting and child beating, describing him instead with the vague and anodyne term 'Evangelical.'
True--Dobson is a leading voice of sorts amongst some Evangelical Christians. Still, the question the media should be posing to the public is not about his religion, but about his violent views of parenting:
Should a man who pushes parents to use pain to train their children have a prominent place in the 2008 President election or American politics at all?
Giuliani and Gingrich Sabotage Civic Debate Using Arguments From Their Best-Selling Books
This past week, America saw two familiar figures impose violent rhetoric into the Presidential debate on behalf of John McCain: Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani. It was a textbook example of the right-wing effort to use violent language not just to distract the public, but to undermine the attempt by citizens to have a pragmatic discussion with an eye towards solving problems.
FOX News Hires Mike Huckabee, Month After Ex Gov Joked About Assassination of Sen. Obama
**APPLICANTS WANTED: Profitable broadcast news corporation seeks on air personality with proven record of debasing civic debate. Must be willing to use violent rhetoric and tell off-color jokes that would warrant Secret Service investigations if said by an ordinary citizen. Preference given to failed presidential candidates who have also joked about assassinating their opponents. Benefits include: medical, dental, plus chance to undermine American deliberative democracy.
[A winning nickname for John McCain--Lickspittle? Hmmm... J]
In her newest syndicated column, right-wing pundit Ann Coulter calls the U.S. occupation in Iraq "a stunning success," awards President Bush the status of "moral giant," and trashes Sen. John McCain as one of "the weakest members of the herd."
Since 2001, right-wing pundits have increasingly used offensive and violent rhetoric to humiliate Democratic Party candidates and politicians and to undermine political debate of important issues. Coulter's attack on Sen. McCain confirms a rising trend of right-wing pundits using this tactic of humiliation and violent language to brand Sen. McCain a danger to the safety and well-being of the country.
One of the best indicators of John McCain's weakness in the general election is the questioning of his manhood by right-wing pundits.
Rush Limbaugh--who likes to dress up as a general and command his listener's to foment political violence--took time out this week to besmirch McCain's maleness, wondering aloud during if the Republican candidate could really count as 'a man' in the wake of his speech in New Orleans (link).
Having joked less than a year ago about killing Mitt Romney (and his supporters), former Republican candidate for president, Mike Huckabee, has now made light of assassinating Sen. Barack Obama.
According to CNN, during his recent speech at the NRA convention in Louisville Kentucky, the former presidential candidate offered the following joke in response to a loud noise off stage:
"That was Barack Obama, he just tripped off a chair, he's getting ready to speak...Somebody aimed a gun at him and he dove for the floor." (from CNN PoliticalTicker.com)
As Huckabee transitions from presidential candidate to media pundit, his habit of joking about political assassination leads many Americans to question the place of violent rhetoric in the speech of high-profile political pundits, as well as the consequences that should result from it.
Why might McCain be reluctant to have himself officially listed on the NRA's event? The answer may well be his concern about being associated with Nugent who, less than one year ago, held up two machine guns at a concert and--in one of the most brazen displays of violent rhetoric by a pundit ever caught on video--threatened the lives of a Governor and three Senators.
Most kossacks know me as a New Yorker, but I am originally from Mitten State (Oakland County). So, I am thrilled to be here, today--mixing it up with local bloggers.
Among other things, I will have a chance to talk to Sen. Carl Levin, who is very interested in blogging. So if you have any questions, post them to the comment thread.
Live blogging starts after the break (follow me...).
For weeks, now, Rush Limbaugh has been trying to incite political violence by giving on-air military-sounding orders, effectively 'commanding' his listeners to wage war against the U.S. electoral system.
The right-wing pundit's 'orders' to his Republican listeners have been clear: vote in the Democratic primaries as a coordinated tactic for sewing division in the opposition party. The goal of such 'chaos,' Limbaugh has stated explicitly, is to foment hatred between different parts of the Democratic Party leading, ultimately, to street riots during the Denver convention.
The ongoing incident raises a serious question:
How does Limbaugh's bid to incite political violence with radio broadcasts differ from previous instances where radio has been used to that end (e.g., Rwanda)?
As usual, Ann Coulter's newest round of pundit appearances included going on CNN to call millions of Americans "traitors" (treason is a crime punishable by the death penalty) and suggest that Sen. Barack Obama is a covert terrorist assassin.
What did Ann Coulter do this week to earn this right to appear on the most trusted name in news?
She published a weekly syndicated column laced with violent-rhetoric in which she suggested than an Obama Presidency would result in the destruction of the U.S. by terrorists and--she joked about lynching Africa-Americans.
Is there nobody left at CNN who cares about this situation? I mean...why is it that a pundit who jokes about lynching blacks is allowed to appear on the largest broadcast platform in America?
Some advice for CNN:
When Ann Coulter jokes about lynching blacks in her weekly syndicated column, pull her from whatever appearances she has scheduled for that week.
Despite the constant flow of violent rhetoric from right-wing pundits, I am happy because my new book Outright Barbarous launches, today! Hurray!!
The book is a follow up to Framing the Debate, focusing not on the difficulty that progressives have in framing key issues, but on the aggressive, violent language and ideas that key right-wing pundits use. The end result of these pundits, I conclude, is not just a confrontational form of political debate, but a poisoning of the public sphere so integral to our democracy.
Progressives have come a long since the last Presidential election woke up so many people in this country. But we still need to dedicate ourselves to the massive project of rebuilding a democracy that inspires and protects Americas, and is capable of solving the huge pragmatic challenges sitting on our doorstep.
On April 5, 2007, FOX personality Bill O'Reilly unleashed a violent rant about Latino immigrants on live television:
What we see in this video of O'Reilly is a key example of a right-wing pundit who uses violent-rhetoric to undermine political debate in the United States--in this case, violent-rhetoric used to create an atmosphere of hate and fear for Latinos.
A little over one year later, Sen. Hillary Clinton--who enjoyed wide scale endorsements from Latino leaders in a variety of early primary states--is sitting down for an interview with O'Reilly.
This is a grave error that risks lending the prestige of a prominent Democrat to a pundit infamous for violent-rhetoric and ideas.
This weekend, FOX News and John McCain tried to convince voters that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) was "endorsed" by Hamas--a lie created by FOX News.
Hamas is a Palestinian Sunni Islamist militant organization and political party listed by the U.S. Department of State as a foreign terrorist organization. By suggesting to voters that terrorists support Sen. Obama, Sen. McCain embraced the long-term effort by right-wing media to define Democrats as supporters of foreign terrorist groups and, by extension, potential violent threats to the American people.
The real story, however, may be that Sen. McCain's campaign laundered a false FOX story by running it through his campaign, giving voters a false impression about the story's veracity.
On Apr 16 FOX News reported that Hamas had "endorsed" Sen. Obama. Two days later, Sen. McCain sent out a mass email echoing the FOX story. FOX then reported McCain's letter and --voila! The original false story had become "real" news.
