60 Minutes - pfaff -- Updated & Bumped
can. not. watch.
So instead, I’ve been reading The Case Against Barack Obama - the unlikely rise and unexamined agenda of the media’s favorite candidate. Interesting stuff.
David Freddoso first goes through The One’s rise in and acquiescence to Chicago politics—names like Emil Jones, Richard Daley, John Stroger, Todd Stroger, Alice Palmer, Forrest Claypool.... I still haven’t gotten to the part where Freddosso lists Uh-bama’s accomplishments at comuuuunity organizer...
Then Freddoso goes through the odd circumstances and bit of luck that actually led to Obama’s win in the early caucuses [Hillary was no body’s second choice] and on to his voting records as compared to his claims of being a “reformer.” Which he seems to be - if by “reformer” you mean “guy who votes the strict party/machine line.
After a discussion of the absurd cult-of-personality Obamessiah phenom, Freddosso goes into some things I had missed, for instance:
Obama wants—and has effectively voted—to abolish secret-ballot elections in the workplace when employees determine whether to unionize. This is a gift long sought by union organizers who have watched their ranks deplete over the years as private sector unions become less relevant to workers.
[110th Congress 1st session, roll call vote no. 227 June 26 2007]
Every assertion is footnoted to the source. I like that. Kinda dispels the notion that this is a an author passing off fiction as biography, duddn’t it?
I also found interesting Obama’s recollection of “just
Frank” - Frank Marshall Davis, black poet and Communist whose presence got the charter revoked from the Hawaii chapter of the NAACP. In Audacity, Obama quotes [or recreates] his conversation with “Frank” after the incident when his Grandmother was, in the fashion of the “typical white person,” so effected by the black man on the street. Obama sought Frank’s council on the matter. Obama’s grandfather and Frank were buddies who would sit, converse, sip whiskey and enlist the help of young Obama to create dirty limericks.
[Your grandfather] can’t know me, not the way I know him. maybe some of those Hawaiians can, or the Indians on the reservation. They’ve seen their fathers humiliated. Their mothers desecrated. But your grandfather will never know what that feels like. That’s why he can come over here and drink my whiskey and fall asleep in that chair you’re sitting in right now. Sleep like a baby. See that’s something I can never do in his house. Never. Doesn’t matter how tired I get, I still have to watch myself. I have to be vigilant, for my own survival ... [snip in Freddosso] What I’m trying to tell you is your grandma’s right to be scared. She’s at least as right as Stanley [grandfather] is. She understands black people have a reason to hate. That’s just how it is. For your sake, I wish it were otherwise. But it’s not. So you might as well get used to it.
I guess he learned well from Frank the divisiveness of “typical white people.”
---
Yet More:
Looking up the above vote I ran across this bit of data:
Barack Obama has missed 295 votes (45.9%) during the current Congress.
Barack Obama has voted with a majority of his Democratic colleagues 96.0% of the time during the current Congress. This percentage does not include votes in which Obama did not vote.
Yeesh - someday, instead of banging on endlessly about the creepy crap the oppo has done, I’ll be able to write glowingly about the terrific and *cough* hopeful policies that my favorite candidate has just proposed.
[... yeah.. I know… don’t wake me up just yet, ‘k?]
Amazing. My tiny moronblog has been monitored *cough* by the Obamathugs. I’m ...honored.
brb *quick shower* *checks locks* Ok - what was I saying?
For a ...refutation of the claim that “Frank Marshall Davis… whose presence got the charter revoked from the Hawaii chapter of the NAACP” [which info I got from Freddosso] see comments to this post.
Therein also find one of the dumbest statements ever about what America “professed to be” and communist tools. Authored by an actual communist tool. Who claims to be “Frank’s” offspring. ‘mazin’...
It is unfortunate that so many people believe falsehoods spread by “Accuracy In Media” (AIM) against my father, Frank Marshall Davis. AIM has been conducting a disinformation campaign against the Obama-Davis relationship. Their “specific misrepresentation” is documented at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX. I invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against any of these AIM lies. If AIM had authentic evidence of Davis’s radical influence, they would not need to fabricate such evidence.
They have it wrong about Frank Marshall Davis. Edgar Tidwell, whom AIM’s Cliff Kincaid cites as “an expert on the life and writings of Davis,” demolishes right-wing misrepresentation of Davis’s radical influence in one simple paragraph:
“Although my research indicates that Davis joined the CPUSA as a “closet member” during World War II, there is no evidence that he was a Stalinist, or even a Party member before WWII. Further, to those attempting to make the specious stand for the concrete, there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology. Frank Marshall Davis did NOT believe in overthrowing the USA. He was committed to what the nation professed to be. For him, communism was primarily an intellectual vehicle to achieve a political end-a possible tool for gaining the constitutional freedoms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for ALL Americans.” (See http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/Kaleokualoha)
You wrote “I also found interesting Obama’s recollection of “just
Frank” - Frank Marshall Davis, black poet and Communist whose presence got the charter revoked from the hawaii chapter of the NAACP.”
That is untrue. The charter was revoked because the Honolulu Chapter refused to hold elections DESPITE the threat of a communist takeover. The NAACP faulted the Honolulu board, including Edward Berman, for failing to held mandated elections.Further, AIM misrepresents the Congressional testimony of Edward Berman by falsely accusing my father of (a) sneaking into a NAACP meeting to convert it into a “front for the Stalinist line” (“Obama’s Red Mentor Praised Red Army”); (b) trying to take over multiple meetings of the Honolulu NAACP (“Obama Plays Reagan In Berlin, Al-Jazeera Journalist Funds Campaign”); (c) trying to take over not the Honolulu Branch, but the NAACP itself (“AP Lies About Obama’s Red Mentor”); and (d) being directly criticized by the NAACP’s Roy Wilkins (“Return of the Dupes and the Anti-Anti-Communists”). In the eyes of AIM apologists these lies may be “insignificant,” but they are VERY significant when levied against my father!
I have devoted an entire post to this NAACP incident at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gG5kN7. Your readers are invited to compare the linked Congressional testimony to AIM’s misrepresentation of the testimony. AIM’s falsehoods are self-evident.
Posted by Kaleokualoha on 09/23/08 at 03:31 PM"If AIM had authentic evidence of Davis’s radical influence, they would not need to fabricate such evidence." Well, there’s that…
"there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology." ...except that in Obama’s book[s]
"He was committed to what the nation professed to be. For him, communism was primarily an intellectual vehicle to achieve a political end..." which demonstrates that neither Frank nor you actually begin to comprehend “what the nation professed to be.”
I’ll give ya that last point—mostly because I don’t care one or ‘tother.
Posted by Claire on 09/23/08 at 08:37 PMYou wrote “there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology.” ...except that in Obama’s book[s]”
What evidence is there in Obama’s book(s) that Davis instructed him in communist ideology? Davis is only mentioned in discussions of ethnic matters.
Posted by Kaleokualoha on 09/23/08 at 09:28 PMFor starters, see the quote above. ”... They’ve seen their fathers humiliated. Their mothers desecrated. But your grandfather will never know what that feels like...." Obama would have had no way to know what that felt like either; his Mother was white and his Father from a well-to-do politically connected family in Kenya. Frank’s little gift to Obama of straight-up racism is a classic CPUSA/CCCP/KGB tactic of ‘divide in order to conquer.’ Class war and race war incitement is a well-known and oft attempted/used tactic against the USA.
Obama uses it in his campaign, today. Obama’s idea that the rich should pay more taxes “because it’s fair” is straight out of the CPUSA playbook—the Marxist ideal.
And, despite his claims of being ‘post-racial’—whatever that means—Obama never hesitates to cry ‘racism’ in response to any perceived threat or challenge. Sure, it comes through surrogates, but a man who actually disagreed with the tactic would disavow its use and answer the challenge himself.
Two examples enough? Your turn:
I also wrote:
"He was committed to what the nation professed to be. For him, communism was primarily an intellectual vehicle to achieve a political end..." which demonstrates that neither Frank nor you actually begin to comprehend “what the nation professed to be.”
Why don’t you wrassle with that one a while?Posted by Claire on 09/23/08 at 10:09 PM“Divide & conquer” is used by ideologies across the board. It is NOT communist ideology. It is a universal tactic. Sun-Tzu advocated it in the “Art of War.” “Straight up racism” is not communist ideology either, because it is used by ideologies across the board. Neither “example” qualifies as “communist ideology.”
Collectivism is communist ideology. The “dictatorship of the proletariat” is communist ideology. Authentic “communist ideology” must be distinctive compared to other ideologies. Even if Obama adopted authentic communist ideology, there is no evidence that Davis instructed him in it. I say again: “What evidence is there in Obama’s book(s) that DAVIS instructed him in communist ideology?”
Recognizing racial differences is not racism. An accurate assessment of the state of racial relations is not “racism.” Saying blacks have a reason to hate whites is not racism. “Racism” is treating people differently depending on race. What “straight up racism” do you attribute to Davis? He had a white wife and five children with her. He believed that everyone should be treated equally, as did MLK Jr. I know this to be true. He is my father.
BTW: A progressive income tax structure has been the foundation of American tax policy for many decades. It is hardly ‘communist ideology.” I believe that under the “Marxist ideal,” there is no private enterprise, no profit, and no taxes. Workers receive an allowance. That’s it.
Posted by Kaleokualoha on 09/24/08 at 02:10 AMAre you really trying to argue that these tactics, because they’ve been used by others, are not favorites of CPUSA and Marxists throughout the world? Are you really trying to argue that to be “real” communist ideology, a tactic must be unique and never previously used by humans throughout history?
Are you really trying to argue that telling a young half-black kid/man never trust white folks is not racist? Do you really think that Frank’s refusing to trust his old friend Stanley just because he was white is not racist?
Do you really think that carrying around a “reason to hate whites” even though particular individuals have never done a thing against you, just because they are white, is not racist?
Are you really trying to argue that a progressive income tax structure is even relevant to this discussion?
rly?
OR
Are you really trying to argue that Frank Davis was not a Communist/CPUSA member? And, failing that, are you trying to argue that Obama was not really influenced by him?
I see you have a ...goal in mind. Good luck with that.Posted by Claire on 09/24/08 at 05:57 AM“Are you really trying to argue that these tactics, because they’ve been used by others, are not favorites of CPUSA and Marxists throughout the world? Are you really trying to argue that to be “real” communist ideology, a tactic must be unique and never previously used by humans throughout history?”
We seem to be confusing “ideology” with “methodology.” According to the American Heritage Dictionary, an ideology is “a set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.” These military tactics have been popular for millennia regardless of political goals. They are not the basis of a communist system. They are not ideology.
Frank Marshall Davis wrote “experience had taught me never to immediately trust anybody white ... and in a determined effort to become cosmopolitan, I participated in all… I still have warm personal feelings for those with whom I worked. This is a big reason why I cannot support the African American extremist postulate that all whites are our enemies… Unless you have allowed yourself to become completely dehumanized by American racism, you value and retain your proven friends, no matter what their color.”
Please note that he wrote “immediately trust.” Outside of emergency situations, a wise person doesn’t immediately trust any stranger, regardless of ethnicity. Taken to its logical conclusion, however, any race-based differences in attitude may reasonably be considered “racism,” regardless of personal experience. Such a broad definition would probably cover everyone, and the term would no longer be useful.
“Do you really think that carrying around a “reason to hate whites” even though particular individuals have never done a thing against you, just because they are white, is not racist?” Of course it is racist and wrong, but Davis did not excuse this hate or any other racism. He merely identified it. All racism occurs for a reason, just as everything else happens for a reason. Arabs may hate Jews, Native Americans may hate whites, Chinese may hate Japanese, etc., etc. Davis never said blacks have a RIGHT to hate, as AIM has misrepresented, only a REASON to hate: a history of victimization. There is a world of difference between a reason and a right. Japan had a REASON to bomb Pearl Harbor, not a right. Al Qaeda had a REASON for 9/11, not a right. Bank robbers have a REASON to rob banks, not a right. John Wilkes Booth had a REASON to shoot Lincoln, not a right.
The “idea that the rich should pay more taxes” IS the basis of a progressive tax structure. .
“Are you really trying to argue that Frank Davis was not a Communist/CPUSA member?” Gosh, no. Where did you get that idea? There is credible evidence from Kincaid’s expert Tidwell that he joined during WWII. Only the CPUSA provided institutional support for black writers during that period. Membership had its privileges.
“And, failing that, are you trying to argue that Obama was not really influenced by him?” Gosh, no. Where did you get that idea? The issue is the type and degree of influence. According to “Dreams,” Davis advised him on ethnic issues. But, also according to Kincaid’s expert Tidwell, “to those attempting to make the specious stand for the concrete, there is no evidence that he instructed Barack Obama in communist ideology.”
My goal is to debunk the lies upon which AIM’s disinformation campaign is based. I have had considerable success. Nobody has refuted any of AIM’s “specific misrepresentation” documented on my blog, although some may believe that false evidence does not invalidate conclusions based on such evidence. This is akin to Bush administration supporters saying that although their Iraqi threat evidence may have been false, their conclusions were correct.
Thanks for your time and keeping this a civil discussion.
Posted by Kaleokualoha on 09/24/08 at 01:42 PMIdeology - aka Values - begets methodology. Conversely, methodology indicates Values/ideology.
Frank’s point about not trusting anyone immediately is a valid one—eminently sensible. Obama’s recollection of his conversation with Frank has quite a different tone. We are debating the worthiness of Obama for POTUS, so that makes his quote more relevant. To me.
OTOH, Frank’s characterization of “American racism” as though it were different from the racism extant all over the world is a clue to his perspective.
"All racism occurs for a reason" - and that reason is not the misbehavior [or perceived misbehavior] of the target group. It is an inherent trait in Humans to mistrust the stranger, the different person. [see the mistrust of northern Canadians for their southern counterparts—and they’re all white (not addressing, in this example, the First People)] Come right down to it, America is the least racist nation. Given half a chance, 99% of folks will give a new guy an even break—allow him to prove himself one way or another. It’s part of the generosity of the American character and is traceable to the whole ‘melting pot’ ideal.
If one really wants to live in that “history of victimization,” one will recreate that victimization in every aspect of his life. It’s a real quick jump through the lens of that closely held “history” from REASON to RIGHT. Neither works out well.
"The “idea that the rich should pay more taxes” IS the basis of a progressive tax structure." ...and that makes it less Marxist how? [note the term ‘progressive’]
If “The issue is the type and degree of influence,” is there any evidence that Frank did not instruct Obama in communist ideology? Cuz, if he had even half a soft spot for the young man whom he was advising on “ethnic issues” [whatever that is] how could he have helped but advise that same young man on other perceptions and philosophies which he held dear and thought correct? It would seem only natural, to me. But, again, the point today is what - if anything - of those pieces of advice and insight gained from association with Frank did Obama internalize and what is his take on them as demonstrated by his choices and statements and proposals? That is where my interest lies.
[NB Not touching your Bush/Iraq statement with a 10 foot pole]
Thanks for your input. Why wouldn’t we, as Civilized people, conduct a civil discussion?
Posted by Claire on 09/24/08 at 03:55 PMYOU WROTE: “The “idea that the rich should pay more taxes” IS the basis of a progressive tax structure.” ...and that makes it less Marxist how? [note the term ‘progressive’]
RESPONSE: The rich have been paying more taxes since the dawn of civilization. It is not a Marxist concept. It is a civilized concept.
YOU WROTE: If “The issue is the type and degree of influence,” is there any evidence that Frank did not instruct Obama in communist ideology?
RESPONSE: The presumption of innocence is well-rooted in Western civilization.
YOU WROTE: If one really wants to live in that “history of victimization,” one will recreate that victimization in every aspect of his life.”
RESPONSE: I totally agree. Each generation after my father’s had less reason to hate. As public attitudes catch up with public policy, such reason will disappear.
The new movie “Lakeview Terrace” is a case in point. Samuel Jackson’s character seems to have no problem with integrated neighborhoods, but he cannot accept interracial marriages. Hence, he is still a racist. Attitudes to such marriages are perhaps the most sensitive indicator of residual racism. Until we can honestly say we have no problems with them, we must still be considered “racist.”
YOU WROTE: “It’s a real quick jump through the lens of that closely held “history” from REASON to RIGHT.”
RESPONSE: Anyone with common sense knows the difference between a reason and a right. Reasons are everywhere. Rights are few.
Posted by Kaleokualoha on 09/24/08 at 05:54 PM
Next entry: ToDaZeD Mental Image Of The WEEK!
Previous entry: Biden: Throwing *Himself* Under The Bus?
