Showing posts with label New Confederacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Confederacy. Show all posts

Saturday, April 11, 2009

The New Confederacy: Tea Bag Revolution

So, while watching the latest installment of the Rachel Maddow show, I find out that what I've named the new Confederacy has moved into a new stage of aggression. On tax day, they will be tea bagging to protest taxes (which, by the way, Obama and the Democrats cut for the vast majority of United States citizens).

That's right, tea bagging, blatantly paying homage to the Boston Tea Party a protest that lead up to the American Revolution, were the American colonies separated from Great Britain. Although, considering that none of these protesters live in colonized areas, but are full-fledged citizens with all the rights associated with such status, they remind me more of Confederate rebels than those early Revolutionary patriots.

Another similarity with the Confederates: protesting something that isn't actually reality. The Confederates seceded because they were afraid Lincoln would abolish slavery, which he had no plans of doing. These people are tea bagging because they fear that Obama will, among other things, raise their taxes, even as he has just cut them.

It should come as no surprise, then, that one of the signs in the video says "YES WE CAN SECEDE."


Accompanying this activity are the usual sentiments associated with the New Confederacy:
  • Obama wasn't born in the United States, so he's not the president
  • Obama is inherently opposed to American values
  • Obama is a threat to the nation and must be defended against, even to the point of Revolution
These are the people who were mad at the left for not liking George Bush after he stole the 2000 election?

I must ask, if this were Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, would be be seeing this? Of course the right would not like either of these Democrats or any other white Democrats in the White House, but to what degree does Obama's race contribute to the level of animosity and rebelliousness expressed by the New Confederates? Is it possible that some just can's stand the idea that THEIR president is black?

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Speak for Yourself, Chuck Norris

Straight from Chuck Norris's own blog post, "I may run for president of Texas":

On Glenn Beck's radio show last week, I quipped in response to our wayward federal government, "I may run for president of Texas."

That need may be a reality sooner than we think. If not me, someone someday may again be running for president of the Lone Star state, if the state of the union continues to turn into the enemy of the state.

From the East Coast to the "Left Coast," America seems to be moving further and further from its founders' vision and government.

Norris then goes on to list all of the bad things he sees Obama doing:

  • Aid to Gaza
  • Increasing the deficit
  • "Stampeding" the Constitution
  • Secularizing the country
This, of course is accompanied by references to our "Founding Fathers." For each offense, Norris juxtaposes Obama's actions with the intents of leaders of old. Of course, if we want to go down the "what did the founders intend" road, we could also point out that they intended for blacks to be slaves, for women to be invisible in the eyes of the law, for poor people to have no political agency, and for the country to be ruled by a small, educated, landed, and elite minority of white men. But then we would be letting facts get in the way.
How much more will Americans take? When will enough be enough? And, when that time comes, will our leaders finally listen or will history need to record a second American Revolution?
Yes, when will we listen to our leaders and get overthrow the government when we don't like the people who are leading it? Oh wait, I think I know the answer. 2010 and 2012 - our next congressional and presidential elections! After all, isn't one of the good things about this country supposed to be that we can vote out leaders we don't approve of? In fact, didn't we just do that a few months ago? Yeah, we thought the Republicans had screwed up our country so much that we voted in this new guy. What was his name again? Oh yeah, Barack Obama, they guy Norris is complaining about.

So, Norris is saying that we should abondon our practice of a peiceful transer of power, overthow the will of the people expressed in a mostly free and fair election, and break away to form a new country. Didn't we do this already, in 1860?
When I appeared on Glenn Beck's radio show, he told me that someone had asked him, "Do you really believe that there is going to be trouble in the future?" And he answered, "If this country starts to spiral out of control... Americans won't stand for it. There will be parts of the country that will rise up." Then Glenn asked me and his listening audience, "And where's that going to come from?" He answered his own question, "Texas, it's going to come from Texas. Do you agree with that Chuck?" I replied, "Oh yeah!" Definitely.
So, he thinks Texas will be the first state to seceed.

He then invites readers to join him, Beck, and other conservates for a telecast about the current "crisis." He ends with this:
Again, Sam Houston put it well when he gave the marching orders, "We view ourselves on the eve of battle. We are nerved for the contest, and must conquer or perish. It is vain to look for present aid: None is at hand. We must now act or abandon all hope! Rally to the standard, and be no longer the scoff of mercenary tongues! Be men, be free men, that your children may bless their father's name."
We should all be paying attention, so that these not jobs can't scheme in secret.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Meet the New Confederacy

For fun...

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Chuck Norris and the New Confederacy

When Abraham Lincoln, a lawyer-turned-congressman from Illinois, relatively new to national politics was elected president in 1960 at a time of great national turmoil, many panicked. Even though Lincoln insisted that he would not abolish slavery, many feared the young radical would do exactly that. As a result, most of the Southern states decided that they no longer wanted to be part of the United States. They quit the country. It was this conflict that lead to the Civil War.

Over a century later, Barack Obama, a lawyer-turned-congressman from Illinois who was relatively new to national politics has been elected president at a time of great national turmoil, and many are panicking. Recently, I posted a news item noting Chuck Norris's desire to run for “president of Texas” and his claim of many conservative cell groups ready to join his cause. I also noted various individuals who seem to have issues with the very notion that President Obama is eligible to be president. One member of the military is even contending that he does not have to follow the President's orders until he sees the president's birth certificate: proof that he was born in the U.S.

As a side note, I know of no such demands for past presidents. Also, John McCain was born in Panama.

As I observe all of this, my mind is drawn back to Lincoln, and not just for all the weird Illinois connections. The main fuss over Lincoln was race: “We're quitting the country because the president might free blacks.” Is it totally illogical to suggest that race may also be at the root of all the fuss over Obama?

First, let's look quickly at some of the complaints about Obama:

  1. He's an unpatriotic socialist who wants to destroy American values and make America less American

  2. He wasn't really born in the United States, but, rather born to an African, Muslim father and raised by Islamic extremist

Of course, we know that neither of these claims are true. There's no reason to believe that Obama is particularly unpatriotic (not that I think these empty displays of blind patriotism are all that good for the country anyway). He's not a socialist. He, like probably 99.9% of other sane Americans, just doesn't believe in pure capitalism. Translation: he likes people. The president was born in Hawaii, after Hawaii had become a state. His birth certificate has already been checked. His father was atheist. He's been a Christian for two decades. He actually gave his testimony of how he got saved (look up his Call to Renewal speech).

So, why have these attacks been so persistent? Let me ask this: what are “American values”? This is a phrase often used attack liberals and minorities. “American values” are hard work, industry, and capitalism – Joe the Plumber stuff. Minorities have been stereotyped as lazy, unindustrious, and desiring handouts. Apple pie is American, sweet potato pie isn't. Baseball is American (but not really), basketball isn't (but really it is). Rock-and-roll is American (now that they've gotten rid of all the blacks), rap isn't. Small towns are American, big cities (where most Americans live) aren't. So, when the President, a black man, talks about improving education, or lowing taxes for 95% of working families raising them on only the wealthiest 2%, or when he discusses issues relating to urban areas, or when he talks about his experience as a community organizer, it's no surprise that the fringe, right-wing nuts that make up what's left of the Republican party label him as an un-American socialist.

It's not just that Republicans disagree on policy issues with Obama. It seems that he, for them, embodies the great threats to the American way. I truly believe, deep down, for many Americans, whiteness is American. Not that blacks can't be American, they just have to be white. This presents a problem, because while Obama is no Al Sharpton, he is also makes no apologies for being black. He plays basketball. He fist-bumps his wife and easily makes references to hip-hop because he actually listens to it (heck, his generation invented it). He's also a liberal Democrat. He talks about cities. He appointed the first black attorney general, who recently made a big stink about race. He used to go to a church where the pastor dared to talk about race openly. His wife is Michelle Obama (read: “angry black lady”), and their kids aren't named Sally and Betty Sue. For all those with JTP Syndrome, these things are threats.

Certainly, there are lots of factors in Obama being labeled “un-American,” but it is clear that race plays an important role in this characterization. I would take this a step farther, arguing that, in fact, many who think like Chuck Norris feel the need to tear down Obama because they are frightened by the fact that a black man is their president. Just as many were repulsed by the idea of living in a land lead by Lincoln, many view being governed by a brotha' is an apocalyptic event. They see opposing him to the point of rebellion as defending the American way. This, by the way, is one of the most disheartening things for blacks: the idea that anyone, let alone a seizable group of people, could find us so repulsing because of our skin tone.

However, such hatred still exist. Somehow, questions of where Obama was born have been raised by military personnel, and notable politicians, including Alan Keyes and Senator Richard Shelby. Was this such an important issue with George W. Bush? Bill Clinton. George H.W. Bush? Ronald Regan? Why was there not more of a challenge to John McCain's status? He wasn't born in the United States. It's sad that so many can not accept the idea that Barack Obama is the president.

So, what can we learn from all of this? For all the talk of unity, hope, and change over the past several months, our nation remains very divided. On one side, there are the sane individuals. On the other is a minority of ignorant, hot-headed, hateful hooligans. Their number is small, but their voices are loud, and their potential for causing damage is great. Unless the economy miraculously turns around in the next few months, which it likely won't, we'll be dealing with these people. Will he have another Civil War? Likely not. However, we should prepare for a level of venomous hate higher than this country has seen in a while. I'm guessing this isn't the last we'll hear of Chuck Norris and the New Confederacy.