The Hot Blog

'Are taking'? 'Have taken', for months now.
The problem is that now these guys are like a cornered animal, and nothing's more dangerous, not to Obama, but to the nation as a whole, as the racism becomes less and less veiled.

"It's in the bloodlines!"

What's sad is that an ignorant vote is just as good as an informed one. And what's scary is how easy it is to find this type of racist response to Obama at this point.

Are we judging all the candidates on the craziness of their supporters now? Because I don't think Obama would validate the positions of those who think we won't even get an election because Bush/Cheney are going use the pretext of the economic crisis to invoke martial law, suspend the elections, and send in the National Guard to imprison all those leftist citizens they've wiretapped (spend some time in the comments section of DailyKos, HuffPo or reddit if you think I'm inventing a straw man).

C'mon, I'm planning to vote Obama, but what exactly was "nutjob" about the response of McCain himself to the blowhard in the audience? Seemed to me like he actually did a bit of defusing. And posting that second Youtube video only makes you as much of a crotch-aiming attack dog as Gov. Keating (though without the official campaign connection, admittedly).

McCain's response was fine and almost at odds with the audience response by insisting on working with his opponents - he was clearly embarrassed by the guy himself, because he never has been one of the crazies, but he finds himself riding that particular tiger this time around.

What's horrifying, BrandonS, is that the McCain campaign is inciting these ragers. The words coming out of their mouths are not their own... they are coming directly out of stump speeches.

If i walked up and down my block telling parents on the block that the guy across the street was a child molester, how many of them would ask me for proof and how many would be keeping their kids from walking in front of his house "just in case?"

Fire in a crowded theater... knowing not only there is no fire, but hoping that you will get a strong, visceral reaction from the crowd... and if someone gets crushed in the rush for the doors, so be it, because emptying the theater in a hurry is in the shouter's interest.

What DP said, Brandon.

In fact they were talking about the sudden creepy rightie rage that's now bubbling to the surface (instead of you know, just hinted at every day) on CNN last night. Everytime Palin speaks she's doing NOTHING to quell the shouting of "terrorist" or "shoot him." If she hears that kind of crap at a rally, she needs to nip it in the bud. Unless of course, she agrees.

And don't anyone pretend she didn't hear it either. McCain is an old fart and he twitched and looked in the direction of a "supporter" who shouted "terrorist" at a recent rally. They screen those people soooo carefully at McCain rallies and they have their finger on the room. They know what's happening and don't seem to mind.

I also totally agree there's nutjob Obama supporters and stuff like that youtube link Jeff Wells posted this morning is silly because if you brought a camera to an Obama rally and asked questions about McCain, you'd be able to get equally uninformed morons on tape.

But there's a world of difference between being uninformed and/or ignorant and being hateful and spewing known lies that incite violence.

My longer response didn't post because I'd been signed out, but this was the gist of it:

Where in the stump speeches have either McCain or Palin called Obama a sleeper agent? Or even hinted at it? Or made comments that could be interpreted as a "wink-wink, this is what I really mean"? A wannabe socialist, sure, but that's been the Republican line on Democrats since before I was born (just like Republicans are all corrupt fatcat bigots in Democratic party speak).

The lowest blow I can recall so far in this election was the "Obama wants to teach your kindergarteners about sex" b.s. A lie, surely an intentional one, and one of the bigger reasons I've lost a lot of respect for John McCain in this campaign. But the crazies aren't shouting "sex predator." They're shouting "terrorist" because they're stupid, they don't like the man's last (or middle) name, and they believe everything they read in emails.

How is John McCain responsible for that?

And "CNN did a report on it" isn't an argument for anything. They do reports on "waves" of shark attacks, box-office "slumps," and anything else that smells like enough of a trend to draw some eyeballs. The crazies were there before. Just because the TV cameras are on them now doesn't mean they weren't there before.

McCain _personally_ has avoided saying this stuff, but he's responsible for the messages coming out of his campaign, which include the "Obama's a terrorist" angle, "Obama's a child molester" and "Obama's not American".

My defense was that the "Obama's a terrorist" angle wasn't part of the McCain campaign, but I completely forgot the William Ayers/Weather Underground stuff, which Palin at least has spoken to.

Withdrawn.

The third link was awesome/pathetic/insane.

Highlights:

1) Commie Faggot!

2) European socialist! (Like anywhere in Europe isn't an improvement over wherever the fuck this is taking place).

3) You want them to die?... "Everyone dies."

What a retarded country.

Honestly, these people remind me of footage I've seen of Serbs living in Kosovo who decided to take out all their bitterness, fear, and resentments in bizarre conspiracy theories of victimization.

Of course, they had just lost a war. Good thing that doesn't apply to us, we've got TWO wars!

Brandon-
That's the thing re; McCain not outwardly *saying* those things. One of, if not the big, Karl Rove contribution to modern day politics is the whisper campaign. It worked to get Bush elected Governor of Texas when Rove started a whisper campaign (ie; no one in the Bush camp ever outwardly said it) that said the popular incumbent democrat woman governor (whew) was a secret lesbian. It also worked brilliantly and ironically against McCain in 2000 when it was whispered he had an illegitimate black baby.

It gets planted by the campaign-never attributed to the candidate-and spreads like blood in the water to the pleebs.

Not to sound condescending, but watch the film BUSH'S BRAIN to get a better feel for where the root of these "commie" "terrorist" "kill him" screams grew from. McCains bulldog Steve...what's-it... is a Rove disciple.

Did Fox remove the video? It's here with a guy raising his hand to ask a question or saluting the crowd:

http://www.mcnblogs.com/mcindie/archives/2008/10/the_single_take.html#comments

"The words coming out of their mouths are not their own... they are coming directly out of stump speeches."

I'd love to see some documentation to back up this asinine statement.

Pretty disturbing videos,especially the third one, blatant racism, anger and ignorance. I thought the US was over this sort of thing, amazing what the ethnicity in a person's name can provoke these days. Just terribly sad.

Angry white people crack me up. This is why McLair and Bush-in-Drag inciting such rage is beyond hysterical. If these people do not understand what's going on. They may catch on in fours years as Marvin Gaye sings from above; "What's going on."

I don't know if McCain and co. are putting the words in the mouths of these nuts, but they're definitely inflaming them and making them feel like it's acceptable to express their outlandish beliefs.

Fahrenheit 451 was a novel about burning books; that is keeping information from people.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was a movie critical of Republicans and blaming Pres. Bush for the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. To be fair, it's also critical of Democrats; it seems they just hate America regardless of who is president. It is available on DVD and widely seen.

The Path to 9/11 was a mini-series critical of Pres. Clinton and democrats and how their actions (or inaction) possibly led up to the events of Sept. 11, 2001. It has not been released on DVD. Now it seems the screenwriter has a documentary about the censorship.

"Screenwriter Cyrus Nowrasteh has taken his battle with Disney and ABC to the video store, where his documentary, Blocking the Path to 9/11, is being released Tuesday." http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0581041/

Bodhizefa said, "What's sad is that an ignorant vote is just as good as an informed one."

Yes, it's also sad when the information for one half the debate is blocked.

You would fit right in with these nutjobs R Scott R. Democrats hate America? Information on one-half of the debate is being blocked? You are spending too much time listening to Hannity and Limbaugh.

"they are coming directly out of stump speeches."

They are actually coming from the frothing AM radio jockeys and hacks at Townhall.com who think that Ayers and Wright are all the ammo they need for Amurricans to "wake up white people" and save the nation from the commie muslim terrorist.

The anti-intellectualism of the right has led to Sarah Palin; the dead-brain trust of Rush etc. are the ones who should shoulder the blame.

Eat shit GOP. You've been making us do it for 8 years.

In Letter to 'NYT,' Man Who Prosecuted Weather Underground Hits Linking Ayers to Obama

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003873017

And Christopher Buckley endorses Obama:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-10/the-conservative-case-for-obama/

"End Times" indeed...for the GOP. They certainly earned it. Congrats to one & all!

". . .cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago."

But link him to Mr. Ayers himself, absolutely.

"how good it is he’s no longer alive to see his Judas of a son endorse for the presidency a covert Muslim who pals around with the Weather Underground."

At least he knows what people think of him.

He can't even come up with a reason to vote for Obama.
"He has exhibited throughout a “first-class temperament,” "
As if that's a reason to vote for him.

"He is that rara avis, the politician who writes his own books."
about himself! Is everyone impressed by his knowledge of himself?

“We are the people we have been waiting for” -- What hubris.

"As the saying goes, God save the United States of America."

At last, something I can agree with.

More Republicans ashamed of McCain:

1.) Former Michigan governor William Milliken, who endorsed McCain in the primary and now says "He is not the McCain I endorsed."

http://www.mlive.com/grpress/news/index.ssf/2008/10/former_governor_milliken_backs.html

2.) Frank Schaeffer, a lifelong Republican who worked for the McCain campaign in 2000. He now says, "John McCain: If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying Mr. Obama as "not one of us," I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence."

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.mccain10oct10,0,7557571.story

This is great. The rabid base is foaming at the mouth, showing their true colors, and sending remaining undecideds into Obama's arms.

Don,

I don't feel condescended to. I'm aware of Rovian tactics, but I don't like the slippery slope it puts us on when we assume all smears against a candidate must have originated with his or her opponent. Many do, of course, and I condemn that, but characterizing the other guy as pure "win at all costs" evil is nearly as unproductive as the smears themselves.

Do you likewise assume that "Palin is a secessionist" comes from an Obama whisper campaign? Not as inflammatory a word these days as "terrorist," but it conjures up all the right images of Confederate flag-waving, black-man-lynching rednecks that can help scare voters into the Democratic camp.

I choose not to believe a smear is campaign-sanctioned until somebody official says it or a legitimate source exposes it. Naive maybe, but it'll make me a bit less bitter and cynical if my guy loses. And just to clarify (or repeat), I believe the "kindergarten sex ed" and "Obama used to swap funny terrorist stories with Bill Ayers" smears both fall into the "McCain sanctioned" category - big knocks against the McCain/Palin campaign for me.

Brandon, do you think a candidate has a responsibility to condemn a supporter who says something like "kill him" or "terrorist"? If they hear that and say nothing, are they sanctioning it?

By the way, that "kill him" - as stupid as it was - was not aimed at Obama. It was aimed at Ayers.

And there is a difference.

That guy in the first clip must make holidays hell for his family.

Merely one example Josh of what according to the media has become commonplace vile at McCain rallies.

Here's some yard signs.

"Vote Right, Vote White."

"Vote McCain not Osama or Hussein."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/10/mccains_chilling_dance_with_th.html

Exactly. The mood is out there. Even if you don't want to agree that it stems from the McCain/Palin campaign itself, they need to put country first and demand that their supporters stop frothing at the mouth and calling Obama a traitor. It's not just annoying, it's dangerous.

Brandon-

I think the "Palin is a secessionist" thing came from the fact she endorsed a group that had the goal of Alaska seceeding (?) from the U.S.

Obama is a terrorist or muslim is a lie
McCain has an illegetimate black child is a lie

Both of those latter examples have a similarity in that they have to truth to them. Palins husband is a card carrying member of the Alaska secession party...whatever it's called.

As far as the Rovain tactics this time around, you're right. I don't have proof, but that's kind of the idea of a whisper campaign. But if they've been going on whereever Rove or his protoge's are being "supportive," I have no reason to thbink it's not happening again.

And thanks for not feeling condescended to, sometimes my posts can come of that way ;-)

Stella's Boy:

I do think a candidate has a responsibility to condemn a "kill him." But have you watched the actual clips, rather than the froth that's been churned around them? I found two on youtube that seem to be the ones people are referring to, both compiled in a news clip here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw3o3y77MaA

Now, you watch that and tell me you immediately read that as "kill him" or "treason." I'm not saying that's not what's being said, but I'm sitting here listening for that specific thing, expecting it, and it's not entirely clear to me. So to expect that McCain or Palin heard that clearly and tacitly approved is, I think, unfair.

And, as the news report points out, the McCain campaign DID condemn that talk. And much more quickly than Obama condemned a certain religious supporter whose more outrageous comments got a lot of airplay several months ago, if you really want to go there.

UGGGHHHH!! I'm so freaking irritated that I feel like I have to defend McCain when I'm not even voting for the guy.

Don:

I know why the "Palin is a secessionist" talk is out there, but my point is it's the same tactic. You take something that's true (Palin's husband joined the Alaskan Independence Party, Ayers and Obama were on the board of an anti-poverty group together), and you use that to imply that something scarier is therefore also true.

Do you really believe Palin wants Alaska to secede from the U.S. any more than you believe Obama is a supporter of domestic terror? If you don't, then how are the tactics (not the degree of severity, just the tactics themselves) any different? If it's ugly and harmful to democracy when the Republicans do it (and it is), why let the Democrats off with a pass, or even a "they started it"?

Part of the problem is, Palin won't hold a press conference. So it's difficult to really know what is really true or false in her world (speaking of 'harmful to democracy').

I know McCain condemned the use of Barack Hussein Obama to rile up a crowd but I have yet to see him or Palin condemn the shouting out of "terrorist" or "treason." Maybe I just missed it. Plus, as I said before, it's merely an example of what apparently has become the norm at McCain and/or Palin events.

Watch the clip. The campaign made a statement.

And "apparently" is a pretty key word in your statement. I've only done a quick search, but I've only seen two clips, the ones I linked to above. Everything beyond that has been "some are reporting," that this happens, or "apparently this is the norm now."

You mean to tell me that in biggest show on the planet right now, in the middle of the youtube/cell phone video era, people are shouting "kill Obama" at Republican rallies with regularity, and the best video evidence is two arguably unclear clips?

Somebody called Obama a traitor at a McCain rally today in Wisconsin. Also, a woman yelled "bomb Obama" at a debate in Ohio between Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss and his Democratic challenger.

Also, Brandon, I don't really disagree with what you've said here.

Why is Saxby Chambliss debating his opponent in Ohio when they're running in Georgia?

Ah you're right jeff it's Georgia not Ohio. Sorry.

Brandon, the difference between the Palin-succession group and the Obama-Ayers connections is the context in which they have happened. Ayers was a radical and now a anti-poverty activist. Obama was not associated with him as a radical but as an activist and has denounced his radical actions. Palin's husband belongs to the succession group, she has addressed their meetings and said keep up the good work. If Obama had attended a Weathermen reunion and said how much he appreciated their actions, then it would be comparitive.

hcat,

The results of a quick fact-check I just did:

Palin's husband registered with the AIP in 1995 and 2000, switched to "undeclared" in 2002.

Palin's quote to the AIP was "keep up the good work...and God bless you." Now, does that mean "you folks sure do love Alaska, and I'm fightin' right there with ya on gun rights, freedom to home school, and Alaskan self-determination in land use" or "You folks really have the right idea - let's join Canada!" Do you really feel like you have enough hard facts to make that call?

And let's please not compare a group of John Birch types with big mouths and no history of violence in pursuit of their goals to the Weathermen's bombing campaign.

And Jeff, I'm right there with you on Palin's zero press conference policy. Stupid move, one of many involving McCain's VP selection. Every time I feel a little pang of regret for not supporting a guy I would've voted for in 2000 if GOP primary voters hadn't been such a collective pack of dumbasses, I read the latest news from the Sarah Palin Show and feel much better about voting Obama/Biden.

I didn't mean to say the AIG and the Weathermen are comparable, just that the AIG is an existing group while the Weathermen have been out of commission for decades.

Fair enough. But it still boils down to guilt by association (and by out of context, non-specific words of encouragement in the Palin/AIP case).

Hey, equal treatment of these two questionable-but-perhaps-minor associations by Obama and Palin are aok with me. Either she deserves as much grilling and commercial airtime, or he deserves to be taken at his word that it's meaningless.

Has the Obama campaign brought up the secessionist issue? I'm not saying its right for his supporters to do it, but if he hasn't brought it up, it's not exactly the same situation as what's happening on the right.

That's my point.

That's exactly my stance on it, Jeff. Although I lean toward the latter - both associations are meaningless distractions.

And thanks for getting me refocused, CaptainZahn. My original point was that rabid supporters don't speak for the candidates, and that the Youtube videos Dave posted at the top were cheap shots, and in no way proof that "The Nutjobs Are Taking Over the McCain Campaign." The nutjobs are just an easy story that's got some traction right now.

McCain's campaign just endorsed the nutjobs. ARGUMENT OVER.

Sadly, Rothchild is correct:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/10/10/1529529.aspx

The Obama camp is now being accused of stooping to a "new low for the campaign" by "attacking our supporters" when eyebrows were raised about some of these outbursts. Surprisingly, no comment is made on the nature of the outbursts or any sort of repudiation at all.

An ugly campaign is going to get uglier. I can't wait to see how Fox spins this one.

I think those people were crazy long before McCain began his latest method of attack, but I still feel like what he's doing is dangerous. To have Palin link Obama to Ayers and for McCain to then say "What does (Barack Obama) plan for America?" gives a pretty obvious implication that Obama is up to something nefarious. A presidential candidate giving credence to that kind of belief just seems extremely wrongheaded to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OowxMcVTjTE

Louis Farrakhan has flatly called Obama the "Messiah". Are the nutjobs taking over Obama's campaign?

I would just leave it at that, but there are a few here that have the nasty habit of embellishing what I say to ridiculous degrees. So I'll say this: NO, I do not think that the nutjobs are taking over Obama's campaign; NO, I do not think that Obama wants anything to do with Farrakhan, and NO, I don't think Obama is a Muslim.

So then, why ask?

He's a dick.

"So then, why ask?"

Its a rhetorical question that suggests the existence of nutjobs on both sides.

McCain corrects rally audience and gets boos

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/10/mccain-defends-his-rabid_n_133710.html

If I were to start a blog topic that stated, "The Nutjobs Are Taking Over The Obama Campaign", and then link to the Farrakhan video, the Obama supporters here would state that Farrakhan and his ilk do not represent a significant percentage of Obama supporters. They might even post the videos DP posted to suggest that there are nutjobs on both sides. And they would be right.

Mystery, it's also a rhetorical question that keeps the meme alive beyond any good reason.

And I might be going out on a limb by saying this, but the McCain supporters (or more accurately, Obama-opponents) in that second video up above scare me way the fuck more than anything Farrakhan has ever said, Jew-hater and all.

Is there any difference in that Farrakhan is a public figure with a certain reputation and the so-called McCain fanatics are "Joe six packs" and regular-folk types?

What the McCain-Palin campaign is encouraging has a whiff of fascism to it.

mystery... sorry you are left with resorting to fake arguments, but that wasn't an Obama rally, was it?

Of cours, there ARE nutjobs on both sides... same as it ever was. But the nutjobs aren't shouting down Obama at his own rallies.

They did it! The U.S. government will use an unspecified portion of the $700 billion approved by Congress a week ago to purchase stocks in a wide variety of banks and other financial institutions.

Didn't the left ship all our nutjobs to Ron Paul and Cynthia McKinney? Contrary to what the McCain crowd would have you believe, most of the actual socialists in this country are supporting a different candidate.

The right-wingers have been in charge for most of the last 28 years and have screwed this country up so badly it may not even be fixable anymore. Socialists couldn't possibly make things any worse.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: