The McCain campaign is whining at hurricane force about "race cards," It is plumbing the depths of racial implication in going after Barack Obama. Under the guise of humor which has all the wit of playground taunts, McCain campaign ads have put on display the mentality that has so degraded politics. The television ad that compares Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears shows a political party so challenged intellectually and morally it regards juvenile depravity as wit.
It has been clear since the primary that the McCain campaign is going to be devoted to ad hominem attacks on Barack Obama. The Republicans call the process "defining" him. As New York Times columnist Bob Herbert points out, they have chosen to define him as "boy." He hasn't the experience, they say, to be president. That damned boy doesn't know his place. Abraham Lincoln did not have any more experience than Obama, and he was elected largely on the effectiveness of his words and his rhetoric. And, says McCain, that Obama boy sure can be glib. Watch out for him.
The so-called conservatives grow indignant when it is suggested that race is a part of their pogrom of character assassination. Their indignation rings hollow when all they do is "define" or assassinate the character. Their intention is clear. Character assassination is their motive and their motif. It's all they have--besides a history of preferring corporate fascism to democracy, war mongering, and incompetence. But they can't turn the country over to that boy.
In South Dakota, this kind of campaigning is familiar. John Thune used it in "defining" Tom Daschle, and it worked. He provided those with festering hate in their psyches with images that raised their provincial ire and against which they could vent their invective. And Thune found college professors who sacrificed their profession to their simmering malevolence and intellectual dishonesty. They got that boy Daschle, alright.
As soon as Barack Obama looked like a viable presidential candidate, the town tavern wits began their campaign on the blogs. Obama is is muslim. And that black bitch he has for a wife. And in the Republican commercials, he hangs out with white women. All the appeals to racist notions are there. Some of the blogs tried to disguise their "defining" through tendentious posturing, but the motive of character assassination has been clearly apparent.
The same tactic is being used on Tim Johnson. The petit-fascists line up like the playground goons taunting the class stutterer. He is slow in speech, so how can he be a senator. Who does that boy think he is?
The real issue in this campaign is whether the values of people of such ill will and malign intentions should rule the country. While we fervently hope Obama wins, it would be politically stupid not to frame options in case he doesn't. In their ad hominem frenzy, the Republicans have defined themselves. They have brought politics down to a depraved and perverted level. Their political mode has become a culture. And those who despise such cultures need to plan their lives on something more than politics.
Better watch yourself, boy.
 Aug 4, 2008
Hey, boy! Who do you think you are?
Posted by: David Newquist - 08/04/2008 10:24 AM (Politics) Aug 3, 2008
Morgan Lewis case is listed as disputed
Posted by: David Newquist - 08/03/2008 11:05 PM (None Assigned) The Associated Press has run a story on unsolved and disputed murder cases in South Dakota. The Morgan Lewis case referred in the previous post is listed as a case under dispute. Jul 31, 2008
Murder is still suspected
Posted by: David Newquist - 07/31/2008 2:05 PM (None Assigned) Early on Monday morning, Nov. 1, 2004--the day before the 2004 election-- a janitor for Seymour Hall at Northern State University came to work to open up the building. He found a body lying at one of the building's western entrances, which were in a courtyard enclosed by the building's two wings. It was the body of Prof. Morgan Lewis, a young professor of German, who had started teaching at the University that fall. Prof. Lewis had a gunshot wound at the back of his neck. Police later found the gun in a dumpster located on the southern end of Seymour Hall. The office building where Prof. Lewis' body was found is where my office was for 20 years. I went in and out numerous times during the day. After I retired, I often walked by the building. The courtyard where Prof. Lewis died took on an eerie aspect, as I walked by the doorway and thought how many times I passed through it at all hours of the day and night. Like many professors who have tons of papers to read, I stayed in the office late at night, came early in the morning, and sometimes after a few hours rest, would come in at 3 or 4 in the morning to get the work done. Once a violent death occurs at such a place, it becomes a reminder of the event. Prof. Lewis' death no longer has its marker. A few weeks ago, Seymour Hall was demolished. I am not sure why. The building had its problems. When first designed, it was a replica of a building on the Harvard Square. However, by the time the state legislature registered its preferences, the building was considerably diminished in cost and accommodations. When the University tried to upgrade the building to meet the standards established for access by the disabled, it found the costs prohibitive. At one point, its site was proposed for the University's new tech center. Even with its inadequacies, the building had some merits. For many years, it housed the reading clinic. It provided offices for departments and professors in the humanties. Most of them have moved to the new tech center where the offices are so small, they are no improvement. I strongly suspect that the decision to remove the building was motivated largely with the intention of removing the reminder of Prof. Lewis' death--which still in the minds of many remains "suspicious." In 2005, the chief of police held a news conference in which he declared the death to be a suicide and the case was closed. The coroner subsequently changed the cause of death from murder to suicide. The death is still suspicious because conflicting evidence and testimony were never reconciled. The case was closed and in South Dakota the records are also closed so that the people can never know the nature of the case or the process by which a conclusion was reached. Suspicion and dissatisfaction remain. An anonymous commenter put a note on Todd Epp's South Dakota Watch recently which stated that the writer was a police officer who worked the case and said he/she still considered the case a murder. The writer alluded to another death on campus in which a young man died of injuries in the lobby of Jerde Hall, a dormitory. Charges were filed against another young man, but were eventually dropped and the death was termd accidental. The writer of the comment suggested that for public relations reasons, the community might find deaths by accident and suicide preferable to murder. That may be so. Until the people of South Dakota have the right to examine the records of how the officials they hire perform, they can reasonably assume that something is being covered up. Striaghtforward investigations are made public. Prof. Lewis' death remains suspicious. So does do its investigators.
Jul 22, 2008
At least two can play this game
Posted by: David Newquist - 07/22/2008 4:29 PM (Media) At least two can play this game
Not to be outdone by The New Yorker, Vanity Fair features this cartoon cover of the McCains. A few more covers like this should keep the red neck intelligentsia pondering its meaning up to election time.
Jul 21, 2008
Is the vulture the South Dakota state bird?
Posted by: David Newquist - 07/21/2008 10:43 AM (Politics)
Still, the partisan media and the blogging dipwings try to keep Sen. Johnson's health the main issue. For example, Pat Powers at South Dakota War College suggests "that he’s possibly unable to effectively performs some of the functions of the position, which could include debating those opposed to measures benefiting South Dakota in the US Senate." This question is raised despite the Senator's performance of the last year and the appraisals of his doctors and colleagues. The sententiously expressed concerns about the Senator's abilities are too thin a veil to obscure the mean and petty partisanship from which the question arises. But the blogs are not as offensive as the commenters. Under the cloak of cowardly anonymity, they join the cry with a malevolent fervor, like the cowardly sheet-wearers in a lynch mob. They are more redolent of the Palestinian terrorists who hijacked the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985. In their "political fervor," they singled out 69-year-old American Leon Klinghoffer who was wheelchair bound, shot him in the head, and dumped him overboard. These commenters pose the real issue in the campaign: Do we want a Senator who has the support of people of this ilk? We've already got one such Senator in John Thune whose campaign against Tom Daschle was largely lying slanders and character assassination. In a state where the town cafe and its malevolent gossips is a major cultural institution and malicious tavern talk is considered a form of discourse, this kind of campaigning has its appeal for some. Do we really want this kind of thinking and behavior to influence our national policy and the quality of our democracy? Once again, the decent people have the opportunity to exercise their voices and their votes--or lose them. Jul 12, 2008
The journalistic vultures are hovering again
Posted by: David Newquist - 07/12/2008 5:54 PM (Media, Politics) The Aberdeen American News has amassed an incredible record for incompetent journalism. Its editorial page and its handling of news both radiate the regressive agenda and the petit-fascist philosophy that it is okay to censor news that does not fit its political agenda and to hype up news that does. The American News has decided to abandon any but a few pretenses to journalism for a role as a partisan medium. It's time to start asking some tough, yet very legitimate, questions. Primary among these questions are: What exactly is Sen. Tim Johnson's state of health? Is he ready - physically, mentally, emotionally - to tackle another six years in... Roland Walter, chair of the Brown County Democrats, pointed out the journalistic errors in the editorial both in a letter-to-the-editor and in an e-mail to the Brown County party members. A former journalist, Walt stressed that the editorial suggested that Sen. Johnson's health and ability to serve are called into question even though the facts--some of which have been published in the American News--are readily available and clear. Walt points out:
When Tim was in Aberdeen last Saturday for a fund-raiser, he told the people present that his doctors said that in terms of continuing to recover from the AVM, he could only get better. For the sake of fluency, Tim generally addresses audiences--as he did at the State Democratic Convention and at the fundraiser--by reading prepared remarks. He goes to this effort in extra preparation to communicate efficiently with his audiences. However, last Saturday after reading his remarks, Tim invited questions from his audience. He received some tough inquiries about issues before Congress, such as point-of-origin labeling, bio-fuels, and the economic downturn--and he answered them with a command of the issues, knowledge about where the Senate is in addressing them, and clear, concise language. As Roland Walter points out, Sen. Johnson has demonstrated this kind of performance since his return to the Senate floor last August. An organization which purports to be a news medium would be well aware of these facts. Newspapers have the right--and the responsibility--to express opinions. But they do not have the right to ignore, distort, or falsify the facts. Distorting the facts was the purpose behind the editorial questioning Tim Johnson's state of health. The tactic used in the editorial is the same one used in the archetypal question "When did you stop beating your wife?" The purpose behind that prosecutorial question is not to elicit an answer, but to plant the assumption that the person being questioned beat his wife--whether he did or not. The question about Sen. Johnson making a full disclosure about his health is not to elicit information, but to plant the assumption that he is hiding something about the state of his health. The editorial contains no summary and analysis of facts. Its sole purpose is to plant the idea in the public mind that the state of Sen. Johnson's health is being hidden from the public. The real question is raised by this old, cheap, and malicious tactic. It concerns the state of intellectual, moral, and health of the Aberdeen American News. The editorial stance of the American News is clear. While its editorial page gives token space to progressive commentary, it has assembled a stable of local regressive columnists that range from those whose writing displays severe symptoms of dementia to those who use their professional offices to give credence to tiresome and foolish regressive cant. At this point, that is all their political party has going, and they spout it endlessly. But the opinions of the editors and columnists are not the issue. The fact that they habitually ignore, suppress, and often misrepresent the facts is the issue. In northeastern South Dakota, the Aberdeen American News has no competitors covering the area. So, it is the major source of information and its pretenses to reporting news are far outweighed by its partisan agenda--both in the opinions expressed and the news covered. When John Thune last ran for election, the American News reported his stump speeches and slightest utterance in great detail when he came to town. When the Democrat candidates came to town, the American News "reviewed" their speeches for their repetition of campaign issues and their performance. When the Knight Ridder company, which owned the American News, was dismantled, people hoped that a new owner would improve the journalism in the newspaper. It was purchased by Schurz Communications, whose major newspaper is the South Bend, Indiana, Tribune--the home of Notre Dame. Schurz owns 13 daily newspapers, 7 weeklies, 9 television stations, 13 radio stations, 2 cable companies, plus some regional magazines and shoppers. Its holdings in South Dakota besides the American News are 5 radio outlets in Rapid City and one in Sturgis. As is true of the news business nationally, Schurz is not as interested in the quality of journalism as it is making a dollar or two in markets where straight and competent news reporting has little entertainment value for audiences conditioned to having diversions, not sound information. During his recovery from his AVM, Sen. Johnson earned some enmity from the press by not revealing where he was undergoing his rehabilitation and by being selective about which journalists he worked with concerning his health issues. He, his family, and his staff realized that it is not good for one's physical or political health to let the journalistic vultures cast their ominous shadows. The Aberdeen American News has given us a demonstration of why that is so.
Jun 22, 2008
Drilling for Columbine
Posted by: David Newquist - 06/22/2008 9:32 PM (Business, Politics) Among the silliest things the regressives believe is that big government is bad but big corporations are good--as if corporate bureacracies are virtuous but government bureacracies are inherently evil. Regressives long for the repressions and inequities of the Dark Ages, and huge corporate bureacraces are as close as they can come to the lavish and oppressive monarchies of the time. So, they revere and cherish huge, global corporations. To them, Enron, Worldcom and the merry band in the mortgage business were just exercising the royal prerogative to be stupid, venal, and dishonest. It all has to do with the worship of power, no matter how it is exercised. Jun 5, 2008
Oh, how they danced around the N-word
Posted by: David Newquist - 06/05/2008 4:30 PM (None Assigned) Nothing is more absurd than regressive commentators and bloggers who offer what they seem to think is influential commentary on the Democratic Party and its candidates. Sometimes the absurd can be very funny. But usually it is despressingly stupid. I have refrained from commenting much on the Clinton-Obama contest because I don't think there is much that needs to be said about it. It simply needs to be accurately reported without all the conjecture and contrived accusations. In cable news and blogs, one gets all sorts of prognoses from those suffering delusions of intelligence. Obama did not win South Dakota. He did get 45 perecent of the primary vote, which is a strong showing nevertheless. They say he has problems with attracting the non-college blue collar and the women votes. The real problem in South Dakota is probably that he is a black man. A few weeks before the primary, I was in a Congressional field office when a prominent man in Democratic politics burst in with a letter he'd gotten off the Internet. It was one of those letters claiming that Obama is a closet Muslim (whatever the hell that is supposed to convey) and anti-American. This letter went so far as to say that Obama is being promoted by forces that are trying to set up America for its final destruction. Even the most casual attempts to verify the claims of this widely circulated letter quickly show it to be an absurdity. But to this former legislature, it had to be true because was right there in black and white. A few nights before the primary, we were having dinner in restaurant where another former Democratic legislator was at a neighboring table. He was discussing the primary with his friends, and he said loudly that he could not vote for a person like Obama. People believe whatever affirms their prejudices and their hatreds of preference. They like to hate other people. And they love to make up malevolent nonsense to justify their hatreds. Such hatreds are bipartisan. As the saying goes, they reach across party lines. I can understand how people might prefer another candidate to Obama based upon political stance. People can have preferences for many reasons. But when their objections take the form of personal malignity and destructive speculations and falsehood, naked racial/sexual/ethnic hatred is hard to mistake. Do these regressive bloggers and commentators really think that the whole world is a bunch of semi-literate retards who can't see through their intolerance, their prejudices, their hatreds? God. Please send us a little more elitism. And give us the courage to call a racist a racist. May 28, 2008
How many times must we kick this rock over?
Posted by: David Newquist - 05/28/2008 11:04 PM (Books) Although The New York Times says that Scott McClellan's book that details the Orwellian deception and mangling of information by George W. Bush and his bully buddies is the first by an "insider," there is, in fact, quite a library by former cabinet and staff members on the subject. But it doesn't take inside information from White House workers to understand the neo-fascism which Bush and his "conservative" faction have imposed on the U.S.
About one-third of the peple knew that the information disseminated by the Bush regime leading up to the invasion of Iraq was phony. They knew that it was called into question, if not contradicted, by the reports of weapons inspectors and assessments by the governments of allies. They realized the war was a device of mass black mail to use patriotism and fear to garner support for a regime with totalitarian designs. And anyone familiar with the propaganda techniques of the Third Reich, the Soviet Union, and Red China--and other totalitarian states--recognized what the Bush 43 regime was doing, even if some members of the regime were too dull to understand it themselves. A distinguishing feature of the propaganda technique is to slander and libel individuals who pose a threat to the regime--just as Bush allies Swiftboated John Kerry and the John Thune campaign used character assassination on Tom Daschle. Neo-fascists consider such demented destruction as shrewd politics. Dominating other people is their purpose in life. The Scott McClellan book is no surprise to anyone but the Bush leaguers. Members of the White House press corps noted a growing tentativeness in McClellan in regard to the Bush talking points before he was forced out as press secretary. Cable and network news do not pick up on such matters, but members of the print media commented on McClellan's obvious discomfiture, especially in regard to the war on Iraq. Put the McClellan book along side those by former state department officers, former cabinet members, national security officials. and journalists such as Bob Woodward, and you have quite a history of an intellectually and morally bankrupt regime. The saddest part is the number of people who defend and support it. At this point, just over 25 percent of the people approve of Bush's performance, but the question is how many who disapprove do so on the substantive exploits the administration has taken against democracy and our Constitutional protections. By 2004, a huge portion of the electorate was cowed or duped intoperceiving Bush as their protective Big Brother, and Orwell's 1984 was a reality in America. How many times does the neo-con rock have to be turned over before we see the things writhing beneath it as America's most imminent threat. Scott McClellan has exposed them once again. We can only hope no more books need to be written on the matter. May 26, 2008
All the gas about gas
Posted by: David Newquist - 05/26/2008 12:35 PM (None Assigned) Dennis Jones over in Bath who hosted Hillary Clinton and is one of the owners of Tacoma Park Place is vigorously promoting the return to the 55 mph national speed limit as a way to address the spiraling cost of gasoline.
When the national speed limit was put into effect in 1974 in response to the Arab oil embargo, I was commuting more than 100 miles a day round trip. I did it in a manual shift American Motors Gremlin, mostly driving on I-80 between the Quad-Cities and Iowa City. When the 55 mph limit went into force, the difference in mileage on a gallon of gas was immediately apparent. Where I made three round trips on a tank of gas before the speed limit, I was making four round trips at 55 mph. At the time I was also working part time with a news organization that operated a fleet of staff cars. After the speed limit was imposed, the fleet manager recorded a significant drop in the amount of gasoline he purchased each month for vehicles that were driven outside the city. On the national level, the government recorded that the demand for motor fuel stopped increasing and actually declined in some months. However, the conservative think tanks went right to work producing "studies " to show that the 55 mph speed limit did not save gas nor increase safety on the highways. The government and the insurance industry found the speed restriction effective. But those who chafe at any government intervention on behalf of the people were moved to inventing arguments against it. Had we learned anything from that episode 32 years ago, we would have power grids for transmitting power from the sun and wind and an array of affordable and dependable energy alternatives. But we let the oil companies and other corporate entities keep charge of managing our energy future. We were warned about our dependency on oil three decades ago, but we chose the conservative option of letting the corporate world determine our future. If we people take our country back, perhaps we can declare our inpendence from oil companies. Perhaps. |
