Getty Images
Romney in Ohio, in front of some of the coal miners he lied to about welfare.
Following Mitt Romney's minor breakdown yesterday, in which he complained bitterly about President Obama not being nice enough to him, there were all kinds of media analyses today on the 2012 race reaching a "poisonous" level. Ben Smith speculated today on how the campaign "got so mean."
What these pieces overlook is any consideration of whether the candidates' attacks and counter-attacks are accurate. The media establishment seems to care a great deal about whether the major-party candidates and their respective teams embrace provocative rhetoric, but spent almost no time whatsoever examining whether the campaigns are being honest.
Apparently, there's a difference between deceiving the public and being "mean."
Alec MacGillis was in Ohio yesterday, covering Romney's remarks in Beallsville, where he spoke in front of a group of coal miners. The Republican spoke at length about one of this new favorite subjects: President Obama's non-existent decision to "take the work requirement out of welfare." MacGillis talked to several members of the all-white audience who said that was their favorite part of Romney's speech.
Yes, one of the more depressing parts of the job of being a political reporter is watching an audience fully absorb a blatant and knowing lie. [...]
Clearly, the campaign has reason to believe the attack is working, and why not? It's no secret that working-class Americans deeply resent those just below them on the economic ladder whom they see as getting undeserved assistance; it's also no secret that politicians have been especially effective at stoking this resentment among white working-class voters, such as the all-white audience in Beallsville, toward an unseen nonwhite other.
But at least in the glory-days of welfare-bashing, the attacks had some grounding in reality -- the system had grown rapidly was in need of some sort of reform. Now, at a time of drastically reduced welfare rolls, the attack is utterly unfounded. And Romney just keeps using it, at stop after stop, in ad after ad. How can this be possible? Well, maybe because very few of my colleagues in the press seem all that troubled by it.
Quite right. Romney's lying -- he knows it, his staff knows it; Democrats know it, and every journalist covering the race knows it. But voters remain in the dark. The folks in Beallsville didn't know the candidate was treating them as suckers because Romney lacks a basic respect for them, and many voters watching at home were probably fooled too -- in part because so many of them are uninformed, in part because they don't realize Romney is deceiving them and playing on their resentments, and in part because many in media are uncomfortable running headlines that read, "Romney Caught Lying About Welfare," even when that's exactly what happened.
It is, to be sure, Romney's responsibility to uphold political norms and tell American voters the truth -- a responsibility the Republican treats with disdain. But when news organizations treat this as routine, and fail to hold Romney accountable for his near-constant dishonesty, they enable and encourage him.
This is infinitely more serious and consequential than whether one candidate hurt another candidate's feelings in a spate of rhetorical excesses. Millions of people will elect a president in 12 weeks based on faulty understandings of basic truths because they ended up falling for a con -- a con made possible because media professionals let it happen.
Leave a Comment:
It got mean when the truth starts to hurt a liar! Yeah, truth hurts, Mitt. Boo Hoo; waa waa! Put your big boy pants on . . . oh, forgot they're on fire!
The truth?
That the Bealsville mine is run by Murray Energy, whose CEO Robert Murray paid to bus in large numbers of workers who support Romney?
The same Murray Energy who was fined $1.85 million for violating Mine Safety and Health Administration regulations on safety which caused Utah's Crandall Canyon Mine collapse in August 2007?
Murray claims that prior safety violations were due to burdensome and often silly regulations- that some of the past violations were for missing toilet paper in toilets in mines. Further, he says the deaths of the 6 miners and 3 rescuers was an act of God- caused by a magnitude 3.9 earthquake. (Source: Salt Lake Trib) Murray knows that Obama is not shutting down coal. So what does he want relief from? Why is he so PO'd at Obama?
Maybe he didn't like the minute slap on the wrist he got from the Obama administration.
Why not dig a little on just who is pulling Romney's strings.
How about a question whether Romney believes the Mining industry is over regulated?
How about some coverage on the staging of this event- who paid for it, and what their history is with Obama and Obama's stand on mining safety regulations?
Or would that be too mean?
Meanness, truth - all of that went out of the window on January 20, 2009 - the day that Barack Huessein Obama took the "Oath of Office" and was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States!
On November 5, 2008 - as mean-spirited old white guys woke up they realized that an African-American was going to be President of this nation, horrified, they've been reacting ever since! Truth is what it is, it isn't nice, sweet or polite - it is the truth!
Correction for my statement regarding the fine. MSHA levied the fine in 2008, prior to Obama taking office. Perhaps Murray may have felt that he could have gotten the finding and the fine reversed as is typical in GOP administrations, but the fact is that Bush was in office when the finding was published.
Obama is using EPA law to designate CO2 as a pollutant and EPA is enforcing law on ash and river pollutants associated with coal mining, but to think they are turning the screws on coal is shear fantasy on the part of environmentalists who want to think the best of the President, and on the part of right wing deregulators who want to think the worst of the President's economic and climate change policies.
Romney
President Obama isn't being mean. It's just all your life people have kissed your white butt. You're not use to the truth so I just seems mean to you.
That was perfect in every way, Maria. I wish I could vote up your comment more than once.
Mr Benen,
Does Ms Maddow know the damage you are doing to her brand by such a poorly written article devoid of truth?
Mike,
Mr. Bennen utilized 5 links and a lengthy quote to substantiate his article. You have provided nothing to back up your accusation. Perhaps if you did the same, maybe start with what your particular definition of truth encompasses.
Actually Mitt is only early. The WH decreed upon the land that laws are what they say they are. Even when the law says specifically it cannot be changed. That takes care of step one. Step two will be declaring rehab, getting a massage, or nothing at all... "work".
So Romney isn't quite right, yet. The upside to all this is that Democrats have set a precedent that President Romney can change laws, kill American citizens, abrogate bankruptcy laws, And give large corporations to his donors with impunity.
I can hardly wait to replay this post when the left starts complaining.
Shooter: Does it matter if a candidate lies?
As much as you want Mitt to be lying, he isn't. What Obama did is illegal. Flagrantly illegal. There is no room for contest that claming waiver power is a naked grab. Why would Obama do that?
Do you really think Obama would do this illegal thing just to try and get more people work? Really? Of course not. One doesn't need a waiver for that, it's the whole point of the program.
Romney is a fraud.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/magpie-moon/7791793772/in/photostream
Hopefully, not a Rape-Public-CON.
;-(
What do you think the odds are that those coal miners standing behind Romney yesterday were ordered by their employer to be props.
This was in the middle of the day. Were they on company time, being paid to stand there and show "enthusiasm" for the candidate? They were all dressed in clean work wear, so obviously they hadn't been in the mine to that point.
They clapped appropriately, but I don't remember seeing any of them smile. One might think that they would be happily cheering if they really supported him.
Then again, why would they support someone who wants to decimate their union, cut their compensation, eliminate safety regulations, and make their jobs tougher?
I'm sure it wasn't an option. It was probably also explained that there would be consequences at their non-union job if the bosses didn't like their behaviour.
I wonder how many of those coal miners have been or are now on "welfare". Food stamps? WICs? Earned income tax credit? COLA? Disability?
Rachel, I have an idea for your show:
A chart that shows the "Mitts" nose growing with each LIE!!
That would be an easy one and would probably keep your staff busy everyday!!
nice idea ! glad I have a 1920 pixel wide monitor !!
Yes Rachel do it
Morons Rachel Maddow DOES NOT WRITE THIS!! This is Steve BENEN's writing.
Don't go calling people morons needlessly, save that for morons. It's called "Maddow Blog." It's not a stretch to believe that she reads it.
No, horrible idea. Leave that silly stuff for silly channels. Rachel does exactly what she should do -- points out the lie and gives (or has someone give) the evidence that uncovers the lie.
We don't need silly graphics to tell us what she thinks of the lie or what we should think of it. If she covers it, it's significant enough to be worthy of attention. If you agree with her, then that's that. If you don't agree with her, you let it pass.
I just watched a clip of Solidad O'Brien taking John Sununu apart yesterday on the Romney $716 billion Medicare lie. I understand Chuck Todd did something similar today. Maybe the tables are turning on the Republican lying machine? Maybe the younger journalists are smelling blood in the water? Who knows?
I just wish Wolf Blitzer, Candy Crowley and David Gregory had Chuck or Solidad's balls.
Actually, when I originally wrote the preceding sentence I left out Candy Crowley and Chuck Todd, but I decided not to emasculate Wolf and David too much.
The tables are turning rather late and have a ways to go before getting real answers germane to salient questions. But, yeah, the tables are turning in the direction towards getting answers to inform the public, which was their job all along.
We still can't get the big boys to ask tough questions or follow up at all. Can you imagine how the conversation would turn if Brian Williams or one of his competitors demanded honesty in his interviews?
It's a big gap for sure. Is it possible that the "big boys" don't actually know the details?
The interview on 60 minutes was an uncharacteristic flatter-fest. I thought maybe the three of them were in the middle of a slumber party. "Paul, when Mitt asked you to go steady, did you think it was best day ever ?..."
I appeal again for everybody to spend a bit of time telling reporters and editors just what you think of their act. (I just got through ripping Adam Nagourney a new one. Dude has to be thinking ... "Dayummmm..." Hahahaha...)
Let 'em know how you feel about it. Maybe O'Brien is the result of some people letting CNN their disgust with media-as-usual.
Steve says:
"This is infinitely more serious and consequential than whether one candidate hurt another candidate's feelings in a spate of rhetorical excesses. Millions of people will elect a president in 12 weeks based on faulty understandings of basic truths because they ended up falling for a con -- a con made possible because media professionals let it happen."
But the consequences of this "near-constant dishonesty" go way beyond the misleading of voters about their choice on election day. What is most worrisome about Romney's consistent disregard of the truth is that Romney may become President and his campaign team would be key advisors. Does anyone think that their duplicity will stop come November 6? No, they will be in the habit of, and will think they have been rewarded for, a consistent pattern of lies. This means that Romney and his team will govern with a continuing reckless regard for the truth, for facts, for reality. The "facts" that will guide their governing will be as made up as they are for the campaign. For example, they make up a fact that, say, a third-world dictator is hiding weapons of mass destruction, and therefore a full-scale invasion of his country is justified. Sound familiar? So his campaign lies are not just unfair and outrageous; they are very, very scary.
"If we release more information, they'll just have more to attack"
------ Ann Romney
This has been their campaign philosophy. Wanna know what a person's going to do? Look at what they've done.
Reckless regard for the truth, and for the people of this country. The other extrapolation is that their plans are much worse than anything they'll admit to.
Look, Mitt, cut to the chase: take the Fifth.
That'd make one hell of a swearing in. Instead of taking the oath of office, President (God forbid) Romney declines on the grounds that it may incriminate him. And probably would. He'd try to run the country like a corporation, and the difference between a corporation like Bain and a crime syndicate is merely technical.
Large sums of money are being spent in advertising to keep up the lies because those lying ads work so well. News people need to report where the true facts can be found and how to find out the truth! Some people never read a newspaper! "Lying ads" is that similar to "lying eyes" a line from a country western song?
As far as Mitt's tax returns, it's actually very simple to figure out what's going on.
Mitt is taking constant criticism for refusing to release more returns. He says he isn't hiding anything. The only reason someone running for president would refuse to release more returns despite a large amount of suspicion is that the criticism and suspicion going on now isn't as damaging to his election chances as whatever the tax returns would show.
Something bad is in those returns. Not necessarily anything illegal but definitely something he feels would hurt him significantly come November.
It's the only logical reason for his actions.
Ed, keep asking and he'll keep saying I refuse. So then WE refuse to vote for someone so intent on hiding tax returns.
Like Pretzelogic in Philly, PA says,
demand to see the long form worth certificate.
(they must be really, really bad to not just show us)
"He'd try to run the country like a corporation, and the difference between a corporation like Bain and a crime syndicate is merely technical." ~ MeddlingMonk.
_____________
We can use our imagination to figure out whom the "stockholders" are in a Romney presidency! People, every last one of us has got to get at least one other person not planning to vote out to the Polls.
Vote! Democrats!
One thing NBC can start to do - David Gregory can bring these points up on Meet the Press. He can flat out say, "Why is Mitt lying?" But he won't. Is the fact that he won't something that Rachel can address on her show? I mean, he wouldn't even stop Rich Lowry from being a bastard to her...
While I agree that David Gregory is a push over as an interviewer, I think Rachel is a big girl who can handle herself. I suspect she will do better in the future.
Isn't that the second time someone has badgered her on that show? It has to be planned. The two of them were in the frame together when he started that bit. Since I'd much rather listen to Rachel talk than get picked at... I don't care for it at all.
Maddow actually devoting a significant amount of time to media irresponsibility seems like a VERY good idea.
You Maddow folks paying attention? Give it a shot!
Rachel does know how to handle a tough interview, I have seen her not even break a sweat with republican candidates who show up to disrespect her in her own space (TRMS). You probably have too.
The situation here is, this was David G.'s space (MTP) and he did not transit out of that (Rachel/Lowery) discussion well. (Perhaps they all know each other too well? Is it my imagination or was there a hint of dinner party air in that moment?)
I have noticed that Rachel does make an attempt to be gracious when visiting other shows. I approve.
What's the precedent on lying? Will the debates act as a clearing house for the dishonesty, or is there a fatigue factor at play where the public has reached the breaking point of lying, and now think everyone is lying and all the lies cancel out in some giant advertising/lobbying/super pac zero sum game?
Mitt Romney will look straight into the camera and ... lie.
Thispaceforsale and DisgustedWithItAll, we have a real situation on our hands.
This nation will not hire a known liar to lead it--though some of our leaders have turned out to be proven liars once in Office. MRomney is a dangerous man. Dangerous. He has persuaded himself that this moment, it is his time to be President. He believes in the aces he holds this time around.
Romney is arrogant. Ryan's "story-line" is showing significant cracks. Still, the Big Show is yet to come:
Above, I said we have a situation before us. The Republican Party is about to implode before our eyes, or if not, our President and Vice-President will be soundly defeated before one single vote is cast in the General Election.
I am counting on Obama/Biden too, do not let me down!
I think the big difference from past Prez races is that for the first time a person running for office will literally lie about just about anything. Normally, this is left to over zealous aides and 3rd parties. It really looks like Romney is not up for the job. How can a person expect to deal with others when he personally says what he says. There is a big difference when an adide says something vs. when the person running says something. It is really a character flaw in Romney that could impact everyone. Can you image what he'll do with foriegn policy?
We can imagine how non-transparent a Romney/Ryan administration will be, just look at the elusiveness and aloofness on display already?
Romney is an arrogant Candidate*. He lacks the humility required to be President of the United States. He is going at this all wrong!
Ann Romney is a snob. In recent interviews, she flatly says, 'My husband and I will not submit to your inquiry(s)!' (Paraphrase.)
What comes next? A snub by Janna Ryan?
*Candidate contains candid, meaning straightforward.
Fox lies everyday. They are a perpetual lie machine. Murdoch is a genius, he has brainwashed a large percentage of the American public and Romney and his crew are following in Murdoch's crooked footsteps as they try and lie and buy their way into the Presidency. The problem we have is that the people in America who believe his rhetoric and lies are the ones who have been groomed by Fox Hate Channel and all the Ministers of Disinformation, and they would vote for an elephant if it was on the ballot, to defeat the enemy of their master. In fact, if Charles Manson flipped to Pro-Life, they would elect him if they could to get that black guy out of the white house.
Mitt Romney and the republicans ol racist asses should have just said and I quote, "You gold teeth, gold chain wearing, fried chicken and biscuit eating, monkey, ape, baboon, big thigh, fast running, high jumping, spear chucking, three-hundred-and-sixty-degree basketball dunking, titsun, spade, Moulan Yan. Take your @!$%#ing piece of pizza and go the @!$%# back to Africa." That's what they meant! Go back to Chicago...Please
Tell me how you really feel!!!
I don't believe that is what Romney mean...but...who really knows? Hmmm.
PS: There is a huge flaw in the notion that more tax, etc. breaks for the investor class will create more investment and jobs. Is is SIMPLE, the investing class is already sitting on $Trillions much of it overseas. Giving them more will only add to the stockpile of un-invested capital.
Exactly!
I do not know where this idea comes from. Are they seriously arguing that the mega-wealthy are all sitting on fantastic ideas for new companies/products that they won't invest in because they aren't wealthy enough? Can Romney point to some examples of ways he would have created more jobs but didn't because his personal income of $20 million in one year didn't give him the financial security to do that? But a further tax cut will?
Haven't the uber-wealthy been the only income group who have been fairly sheilded from the effects of the depression, I thought profits among the highest income groups were up, not down? If so, were is the job creation?
Job creation comes from putting more money in the hands of the largest amount of people, increase the spending power of the middle and lower classes. This largest group of the population will spend more on products and services, thereby increasing demand and growth in those areas. If you reduce their spending power by cutting off assistance and taxing them more, how will they create demand for these wonderful new products and services the billionaires will be offering you?
Punishing those who are already suffering the most is at worst immoral and at best going to stunt the recovery, in my opinion.
The extremely wealthy are often wealthy because they are hoarders of money. Some aren't. Some were in the right place at the right time and ended up in the path of a river of money. Like Bill Gates. If he were five years older or younger, he'd just have been a software engineer at someone else's company.
Romney is different. He started with a giant pile of money he inherited from his father, and he's made a concentrated effort to make that pile into an even bigger pile. If he'd been doing the same thing with matchbooks or ketchup packets all these decades, we'd recognize him as a man with a mental illness. Why is hoarding dollar bills viewed as a good thing when hoarding any other item is regarded as a sickness? Because money is a fetish, and snowglobes aren't. I don't think that's a good enough reason.
Plausible?
Revealed: global super-rich has at least $21 trillion hidden in secret tax havens
http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/upload/pdf/The_Price_of_Offshore_Revisited_Presser_120722.pdf
That site makes me want to get Timothy Hutton and the Leverage crew to figure out how to "steal it back" I just love that show…
We get them to run a front Cayman Island bank. Hardison could set up a fake website where every time someone wants to gaze upon their account online, he gets the passwords and transfers the money to a list of charities, Obama campaign and Democratic or other strategic campaigns. Anything to get money circulating again, instead of sitting off shore.
I leave the writing to the Leverage writing staff how to make the scheme more exciting to watch and technologically advanced.
Yes@john-53302
Adding to that stockpile this country doesn't need.
Another ideologue albeit wily in Ryan now heating up the campaign alongside one sans intellect.
The likes of Koch Bros, Sheldon, foreign lobbies lining it up with money. It has been down and dirty and will get even more so.
Elections USA.
Contrary to the illusions of Alec MacGillis and Steve Benen, President Obama DID INDEED STRIP-OUT WELFARE'S WORK REQUIREMENT. Both "reporters" (or, whatever they are), should at least have the stones to say what really happened!
No, he didn't waive the requirement -- there are still basic levels of work required. You're getting your facts from liars. I recommend the Washington Post's fact check site, but there are plenty of other disinterested parties who have weighed in.
Why don't you read what was sent to the states instead of repeating someone. It did not gut the welfare rules... They (the States) are forced to show they can do better than the current rules.
The "waiver" is nothing more than permission for a STATE GOVERNOR to submit a plan to the federal government that makes adjustments to a STATE'S REQUIREMENTS regarding "welfare" eligibility. The ground rules that the President okayed include requiring the STATE certify that the new rules assure that the work requirement is expanded by at least 20 percent. The rules were issued at the request of STATE GOVERNORS, including Repucblicans, who wanted some additional flexibility at the STATE level because of the condition of the STATE economies.
Those are the FACTS.
Why lie about something that's so easily fact checked?
It's something in the kool-aid they drink.
Truth is not believable.
Wow! Lucy from "Peanuts" showed up.
Dear Mitt.
You can dish it out but you can't take it.
Are you referring to Sir Mitt.
"You can dish it out, but you got so you can't take it no more."
But I'd prefer to hear, "Mother of mercy! Is this the end of Mittens!?" (Tommy guns optional.)
.I wonder if the coal miner's in that picture know that Romney is the kiss of death for union's.
Kiss of death for the unions and a new pay rate of $7.50 per hour!
Romney cannot take what he dishes out.
He's not Presidential material.
No spine, no clear plan, whines when it gets rough.
WEAK.
How about we all send Mitt some pacifiers, maybe that will make him feel better if he sucked on a few?
Coal miners are good workers and like any worker, thinking of their jobs. But the coal industry is not going away if we have alternative energy. This should be viewed as transition to cleaner, safer domestic energy. Jobs coal miners do is very dangerous in more ways than one. These calls for renewable energy should be seen as addition to jobs, not instead of. There will be jobs (safer jobs) in renewable energy that would help with health and safety concerns of employees and their families. The conservative former head of GM, Bob Lutz says the electric car should not be viewed as an enemy, but as energy security. http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2007/12/22/bob-lutz-the-man-who-revived-the-electric-car.html
http://energypolicyinfo.com/2012/04/bob-lutz-electrification-is-key-to-energy-security-strategy/
Sandy have you checked your electric bill lately. It's doubled in the midwest. He's regulating the coal fire electric plants to death. Coal mners our out.
I am proud to say that I have solar panels on my roof and the meter is going backwards. Mainly for that reason, the "little" manipulation of the grid immediately after the deregulation went into effect caused my bill to almost triple. Rolling blackouts in CA, that was the final straw.
There is a self described conservative advising people to think of energy security and I think that is wise. Coal miners can learn to make and install solar panels, etc.
Who is this 'he' you are alluding to, 392, and what regulations?
Where I live, there are no privately-owned power companies. At all. Not a single freaking one. They are all owned by municipalities, or counties, or compacts of counties, or cooperatives. And the whole system is regulated by the state. By your logic, 392, I should be paying the highest electric rates of all because of how strictly regulated the system is. But it's the reverse, for the reason that the rates are held in check by the popularly-elected local governments that own the power companies.
Feel free to shriek "Socialism!" like a schoolboy now, if you want.
As sandyc has pointed out, it's deregulation that has led to spikes in states like California and Ohio and I presume a few others as well. Trusting a corporation devoted to maximizing profit is like trusting a newborn with a dingo: it's a stupid and ultimately fatal act of optimism.
Hey, Mitt! How does it feel when someone else has the hair clippers?!
STOP THE LYING MITT! MSNBC should not take any political ads from these liars unless they are honest! Media can help to stop the lying!
OK, I admit the following is just at the level of school yard name calling, but. . .
Has anyone noticed that Mitt Romney walks like Martin Short's character Ed Grimley? I've just seen footage of him walking across the stage in front of the coal miners and that is all I can think when I see him.
A few weeks ago I caught a snippet of Mitt @ a campaign function (snippets are all I can take!); there was also some footage of Barack Obama striding to his podium - with his customary feline grace. Whatta difference! Willard appears to have a poker up his wazoo (sic). Perhaps his Magical Mormon underwear chafes?! Aloha . . .
I noticed that too ... he looked almost as if he's wearing a back brace, his shirt was really poofy and overly-large in that clip. Maybe that explains his flip-flopping weirdness, he truly can't remember what he's said because he's on pain meds all day. Lovely. Stoner-Mitt, just what the country needs.
Do you remember back in 2010 when Rachel went to Connecticut prior to the midterms, and spoke with that Young Republicans guy? For one part of the interview they were on a short flight of steps outside a building. Rachel was sprawled out along the steps like a person, while the guy was sitting ramrod straight, legs tucked up directly in front him, knees together, his hands on his knees and his elbows close to his sides. He has all one straight line as much as it's possible for a seated person to be.
The body language tells you all you need to know. It's not just Romney. It's all of them, if you take the time to look. Rigid thoughts expressed in rigid bodies.
Romney says that its mean and that hatred is pouring out of the Obama ads. But what Romney doesn't realize is that he is the one that didn't have any compassion or respect for any of those workers that lost there jobs when he made millions at Bain. That is the difference between Obama and Romney. Obama actually cares about everyone in this country
Whatever they complain about that's the exact thing they're getting ready to do thrice as bad.
Swiftboating - watch for attack on Obama for being black, with the cover fire of this outrage that Biden insulted blacks.
Then ask this question, what about the Black Panthers making the remark about putting their foot on the GOP throat. Sounds like race war to me. I've never once heard Romney nor Ryan bring race into the politics. Where is Obama admission forms and transcripts to Columbia and Harvard University. Why doesn't he produce them. It sure wasn't grade point average, to gain entrance to outstanding Universities. The only way is foreign exchange. Show your records OBAMA. And now we have Joe the Nut Biden talking about chains. Is that racism? WOW allot of coocs out there.
Do you know the grade point that is required to gain admission with a foreign exhange into Columbia? Harvard? Knowing the answer to that question may cause you to hesitate in writing a piece such as the one you wrote. Good place to start your research! Have fun! Racist not but just birther, that is not racist?
History: Black Panthers were formed to defend black people from being killed, which they were. The peaceful Marches were outstanding, but people were getting dogs sic'ed on them and fire-hosed from POLICE, not to mention what KKK did and whoever killed MLK and the little girls in church. Those civil rights marchers were lawfully assembling fro a redress of grievances and they were denied and denied violently.
We see a remnant of that today, there IS DEFINITELY a view that certain racial profiles were being singled out to stop from voting, which was supposed to be made illegal. Look at how certain counties were targeted for voter I.D. laws. GOP folks stating they paved the way for Rmoney to win in PA. That is viewed as GOP having foot on necks of people of color. Black Panthers are defending what is viewed as a threat to themselves.
The peaceful Marches were met with violence when people of color were asking for equality instead of Jim Crow, which is DEGRADING all by itself. Tell me, who started the race war and who can't stop DEGRADING people of color and other non WASPs?
Obviously, the GOP do want to make the discussion be about race and war and religion and war. They claim to be victims, when they seek to victimize those unlike themselves. They say it's about what they "would do" for jobs, then turn around and claim victimhood.
You hear chains referring to regulating commerce (contitutional) and think race? That's not what I heard at all, I heard the Republicans want to shackle people with legislation but unshackle commerce, which is the opposite of Constitution. People ought to read it every so often.
FYI
I knew a couple many years ago that worked with the Black Panthers on food programs for poor children. The couple was white. So don't judge the Black Panthers on the propaganda you hear.
392 conveniently doesn't know what a 'dog whistle' is. I'm sure he's deliberately not hearing. He wouldn't want to jostle that concern-tr0ll thing he's got going.
Sandy, are you a Government worker? You sound like one! You don't even know what your talking about. Go back to school with your Fiction remarks. Zimmerman and the Million dollar bounty. You get what you deserve.
MeddingMonk, well yourjust what your name is MeddingMonk, what ever it is!
No. And don't tell me what to do.
Better yet to the ignore box with you.